;v ■ -, ^^■'^' .-, . 




^f^^irlMMh 




•^sann-" V 






aa^/^AAaAa-. 






^''m^NtN^ 



'^£Mfm 



^h^A 



,.r.fi^'^:r--„:mm 






;.".■/> ^:/^' 






m-^' 






^^^mMm^^^^^. 



^mMiim 



Wm 















-^""riAAAAAWft^^ft 



A^Afl/^^fl^AArt^^/^A: 



f^-:;;,,,^..^^^ 



^f^^^^A^f,^^nnO(VmSrS^ 






nrT/^^. 



Mm 



^mm^fms^ 



/1'\:-;V.;»a.a: : *.aAaa. 



fffff^iiffrrfr^ 



Sn«v/WA^^--„ 



?Ma/^/^Aa*/»/^AA^/^/ 



a« 



m^Ai. ' 



^jmmMMM 







'm> 



L»:3 









A 



THE LANGUAGES 

OF THE 

SEAT OF WAR IN THE EAST. 

WITH A SURVEY 

OF THE 

;. THREE FAMILIES OF LANGUAGE, 
SEMITIC, ARIAN, AND TURANIAN. 

BY 

Ffleirlth MAX MULLER, M.A., Ph. D. 

TAYLORIAN PROIi'ESSOR OF EUROPEAN LANGUAGES AND LITERATURE 
AT THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD. 



SECOND EDITION, 

WITH AN APPENDIX ON THE MISSIONARY ALPHABET. 

AND 

AN ETHNOGRAPHICAL MAP, DRAWN BY AUGUSTUS PETERMANN. 



LONDON AND EDINBURGH 
WILLIAMS AND NOR GATE. 

LEIPZIG 
F. A. BROCKHAUS. 

18 55. 



p3 

e 



<3> 



TRANSFER 



9>. 



DEC 6 1t44 



J 






PREFACE. 



TO SIR CHARLES TREVELYAN, K. C. B. 

My Dear Sir, 

Conscious as I feel of the many 
defects of this Essay on the languages of the seat of 
war, I wish to plead no other excuse for its publication 
than the kind encouragement you gave the writer , and the 
hope held out to him that others would make allowance 
for the circumstances in which it was written. These 
pages were conmmenced in answer to a communication 
from yourself; but they have expanded into what is too 
long to be called a letter, and too short and superficial 
to deserve the name of a book. Indeed, had you not 
given me leave to print your letter, I should not know 
how to defend myself against the charges of precipitancy 
and presumption. This, which gave the first impulse to 
my undertaking, will serve as the best introduction; and, 
at the same time, will explain the objects which I have 
kept in view. 

"My Dear Sir, '-20^^' March, i8S4. 

"I have informed all our young Commissariat 

Officers under orders for the East that, besides perfecting 

themselves in French and Italian, they will be expected 



IV 



to learn at least one Eastern language, so that there may 
be among them men who will be able to communicate 
freely with the inhabitants of each province in their own 
language; and I have supplied them, as far as I have 
been able, with elementary books in these languages, and, 
with your help, with a few brief instructions to give the 
first direction to their efforts. 

"But something more than this ought to be attempted. 
We cannot tell how far and how long this remarkable 
intervention of the Western nations in Eastern affairs may 
lead us; and I know^, from my Indian experience, that a 
knowledge of the native languages is an indispensable 
preliminary to understanding and taking an interest in 
native races, as well as to acquiring their good will and 
gaining influence over them. Without it, officers charged 
with important public affairs , feeling themselves at the 
mercy of a class of interpreters whose moral character 
is often of a very questionable kind, live in a state of 
chronic irritation with the natives, which is extremely ad- 
verse both to the satisfactory transaction of business, and 
to the still more important object of giving to the people 
of the country a just impression of the character and in- 
tentions of our nation. 

"It is, therefore, extremely desirable that the atten- 
tion of all our young officers who are, or are likely to 
be, employed in the East, not only in the Commissariat, 
but also in the military and naval services, should be 
directed to the study of the languages which are spoken 
in the northern division of the Turkish empire, and the 
adjoining provinces of Russia. 

"If you agree with me in this, you will at once feel 
that there is a call upon you to help in this good work. 
What I would suggest is, that you should prepare a treatise 
showing. 



"1st. What are the languages spoken, in that part of 
the world, giving a general idea of their territorial limits, 
and of the classes of people by whom they are spoken; 

"2ndly. The family to which they belong, and their 
general character and structure, and the alphabets by 
which they are expressed; and 

"3rdly. The best elementary and other books in the 
respective languages, and where they are to be procured 
as far as you are aware. 

"I find some interesting notices in your article in the 
'Edinburgh' on Comparative Philology, of the differences 
between ancient and modern Greek. An expansion or 
even a reprint of these would be an obvious aid to our 
young men fresh from school or college who would be 
disposed to apply themselves to the study of modern 
Greek. 

"The Russian language should be included in your 
sketch; and you should show, as far as you are able, 
what is the extent and nature of the difference between 
it and the Bulgarian, Servian, and other neighbouring 
Slavonian dialects. 

"You will, no doubt, be able to tell us what is the 
language of the Tatar population of the Crimea, and of 
the leading tribes of the Circassians, including that of the 
redoubtable Shamil. 

"I have only two further suggestions to make — 

"1st. That whatever you do should be done quickly. 
Every part of this great effort, including this important 
literary adjunct, is under war pressure; and 

"2ndly. That you should tell us at once what you 
now know, leaving the rest to be perfected hereafter as 
you have opportunity. 

"You might conclude the Treatise with an admission 
of the incompleteness of the sketch, and an invitation 



yi 



to those who will have an opportunity of investigating 
the different languages on the spot to communicate the 
result of their researches for the purpose of enriching a 
second edition of the Treatise. 

"Yours sincerely, 

"C. E. Trevelyan. 
"To Professor Max MiiUer." 

To this I need here add but few remarks. It will be 
seen that on many of the languages spoken at the seat 
of war our i'nformation is very scanty, and that some of 
the most important problems of Comparative Philology, 
in connection with these languages, must wait for their 
solution until new and trustworthy materials have been 
collected to illustrate the grammar of the dialects spoken 
along the Black and the Caspian Seas. Here, then, is 
a field open where an officer with taste and talent for 
languages , may do great service, and employ his leisure 
hours in a manner that will be of practical use to him- 
self, while advancing also the science of ethnology. Some 
of the greatest discoveries in Comparative Philology have 
been made by English officers; and the names of Sir 
A. Burnes, Colonel Rawlinson, and many others, show 
that these scientific pursuits are not incompatible with a 
conscientious discharge of the highest political and mili- 
tary functions. If attended by a native servant, a Circas- 
sian, an Albanian, or a Kurd, the officer should endea- 
vour to master his language. He might ask him first for 
a number of words, afterwards for the paradigms of 
declension and conjugation, and attempt to write them 
down. It is by no means an easy task to collect the 
grammar and dictionary of a language from the mouth 
of a native. Yet it has not unfrequently been effected, 
and he who would make himself the author of a good 



VII 



Circassian or Kurdian grammar would leave his name on 
a monument even more lasting , perhaps , than military 
achievements. 

In writing down an Oriental language by ear, it will 
be essential, however, that a certain system should be 
observed in representing foreign sounds by Roman letters. 
Eastern dialects contain certain sounds that have in Eng- 
lish no corresponding letters. These must receive alpha- 
betical expression. Again, in English the same sound is 
frequently written in two different modes, as in ravine, 
been; boat and note; date and gait; while many vowels 
and consonants have more than one power, as in ravine 
and pine; date and hat; through and cough. 

Now, without some agreement that, in transcribing 
foreign languages, every letter shall always represent but 
one sound, it will be impossible to say what power, for 
instance, an / might have when used in a list of foreign 
words. A traveller again, who would allow himself to 
express the sound of i, as heard in ravine, promiscuously 
by i, ee, ea, or y, would soon find himself unable to 
pronounce the words thus written down from oral com- 
munication. 

This inconvenience has been long felt, and chiefly by 
missionaries, to whom the reduction to writing of the 
languages spoken by savage tribes has been always an 
essential duty. An English missionary would be inclined, 
if he heard the sound of i (as in ravine), to express it 
by ee; a French missionary by i; and translations of the 
Bible, printed according to the English and French systems 
of spelling, would take an appearance so different that a 
native who had learned to read the one would not be 
able to understand the other. 

Many attempts have been made to remedy this defect, 
and to settle a uniform system of expressing the pro- 



VIII 



nunciation of foreign dialects. All that is required is to fix 
on certain letters to express sounds which do not exist 
in English, and to restrict all other letters to but one 
phonetical value. This may seem a comparatively easy 
task, yet uniformity, without which all other results are 
nugatory, is so difficult to attain between different nations, 
societies, or individuals that the realization of a common 
alphabet is still far distant. I give in an appendix (page XV) 
an abstract of an alphabet, lately the subject of several con- 
ferences in London, which the chief Societies have since 
resolved to submit to not less than five hundred of their 
missionaries, who will test it in the course of the next 
few years, and then report on its merits and defects. It 
is based on the principle of analogy, so ably advocated 
by Sir William Jones, and adopted by Professor Wil- 
son in his Glossary of Indian Terms. The differences 
between Sir William Jones and Professor Wilson, and 
between both and the Missionary Alphabet arise from the dif- 
ferent application of this principle. The chief cause of dif- 
ference has been the difficulty of agreeing upon certain 
new types, whether accented or otherwise modified, or 
again of procuring these novel types even when agreed 
upon. It has therefore been the leading principle in framing 
this Missionary Alphabet to avoid altogether the necessity 
of new types, and thus to remove the greatest, if not 
the only obstacle in the way of uniformity. 

It may be remarked that most of the grammars and 
dictionaries recommended in this Essay, as likely to afford 
assistance to the student of languages, are written by Ger- 
mans, Frenchmen, Danes, or Russians. This is not owing 
to any national predilections on my part. On the contrary, 
I believe that where grammars written by Englishmen 
can be procured, they will generally be found the most 
useful and practical. But their number is at present com- 



IX 



paratively small from the paucity of Oriental scholars in 
this country. 

It is undoubtedly high time that something should be 
done to encourage the study of Oriental languages in 
England. At the very outset of this war, it has been 
felt how much this branch of studies — in emergencies 
like the present so requisite — has been neglected in the 
system of our education. 

A man-of-war is built in less time than an Oriental 
scholar can be launched ready to converse with natives, and 
capable of procuring supplies, gathering information, trans- 
lating proclamations, wi^iting circulars, carrying on par- 
leys, assisting at conferences, and, finally, of wording 
the conditions of a treaty of peace. In aU other coun- 
tries which have any political, commercial, or religious 
connections with the East, provision has been made by 
government or otherwise to encourage young men to 
devote themselves to this branch of studies. Russia has 
always been the most liberal patron of Oriental Philology. 
In the Academy of Petersburg there is a chair for every 
branch of Oriental literature; and there are schools in 
that city, at Kasan and elsewhere, where the chief lan- 
guages of the East are taught.- Scientific expeditions are sent 
out to different parts of the world, travellers supported 
and encouraged, and their works, gTammars or dictionaries, 
printed at the expense of Government. This no doubt 
is done in the interest of science, but at the same time 
other interests are served. If Philology owes much to 
Russia, ever since the days of the Empress Catherine, 
Russia knows that she owes something to her linguists 
for her diplomatic successes, and this more especially in 
the East. 

Other countries also , less immediately connected with 
the East, find it expedient to encourage Oriental learning. 



The French Academy has always counted among its mem- 
bers the chief representatives of every department of 
Oriental Philology; and for more practical purposes, the 
Government has founded a school, "L'ecole pour les lan- 
gues Orientales vivantes", where Hindustani, Persian, 
Arabic, Armenian, Chinese, and Turkish are taught by 
the most eminent professors. At Vienna there is an 
Oriental seminary; and the Imperial Press possesses the 
richest collection of Oriental types in the world. More 
Oriental works are brought out there than at any other 
press in Europe, and, as the Government makes no profit, 
the expense of printing is about one fourth of what it is 
in England. Denmark sends regular scientific missions 
to the East, with a view to encourage the study of Oriental 
languages; while Prussia finds it expedient to give similar 
encouragement to young Oriental scholars employed after- 
wards with advantage, as consuls and interpreters in her 
service. 

In England alone, where the most vital interests of 
the country are involved in a free intercourse with the 
East, hardly anything is done to foster Oriental studies. 
The College of Haileybury, hitherto most liberally sup- 
ported by the East India Company, is the one exception. 
It is felt, however, particularly at the present moment, 
that the country requires a larger supply of men than can 
be accommodated at Haileybury; and those possessing a 
thorough knowledge not only of Sanskrit, Hindustani, 
and Telugu, but of Persian, Arabic, Turkish, Armenian, 
and even Chinese. But it is unnecessary to found aca- 
demies, schools, seminaries, or imperial printing offices, 
in order to encourage the study of Oriental languages in 
this country. All that is required is to remove the dis- 
abilities under which Oriental scholars have hitherto la- 
boured. I speak only of the two Universities, Oxford in par- 



XI 



ticular. For here a classical scholar, a student of modern 
history and law, a mathematician , and a lover of physical 
science, may gain honours, exhibitions, fellowships, and 
preferment. Why not a student of Oriental languages? 
If a man , after passing his Moderations , is now allowed 
to devote his last year at College to more special sub- 
jects — the classics , astronomy , geology , or French 
history, and can thus obtain his degree and the highest 
honours, why should the Schools be closed to one who 
has made Hebrew, or Arabic, or Sanskrit, or Persian, 
the subjects of special study? A knowledge of these 
languages will be useful to the clergyman whether at home 
or abroad. A knowledge of Sanskrit — the basis of 
Comparative Philology — will be an advantage to the 
classical scholar, and even a judge who is sent to India 
will not find occasion for regret if he has read the laws 
of Manu in the original language, and acclimatized his 
mind to that intellectual atmosphere in which he is hence- 
forth to live and to act. But even from a merely edu- 
cational point of view, a knowledge of Oriental languages 
is not less beneficial to the mind than French history or 
than botany. A new language is the key to a new lite- 
rature, to a new system of thought, to a new world of feeling. 
It widens our views of the powers and destinies of the 
human race, and allows us an insight into the govern- 
ment of the world universal. Nay, there is hardly any branch 
of classical, mathematical, or physical studies so rich in 
lessons of morality, of history, and of religion. 

The foundation of a fifth school, a School of Lan- 
gTiages (excluding Greek and I/atin) at the University 
would, it is my belief, give a sufficient stimulus to this 
branch of studies. We have large endowments for Oriental 
Professorships, and their number might easily be increased. 
If a few exhibitions were added; if honours could be 



XII 



gained in Hebrew, Arabic, Sanskrit, or Persian; if fel- 
lowships were awarded to distinguished linguists, and tra- 
velling fellowships founded for those who desire to gain 
a practical knowledge of Oriental languages; if Oxford 
men were enabled to compete for Indian appointments — 
fellowships, which, after twenty years of useful activity, 
yield a pension of a thousand a year — if some con- 
sular and diplomatic appointments in the East were given 
to the University; and if the Press would procure Oriental 
types sufficient, and afford the opportunity of publishing 
works in all the chief Eastern languages • — these changes 
effected, and I believe we should soon see England take 
in Oriental Philology the lead to which she is at present 
indifferent. 

These are suggestions thrown out in a very hurried 
manner; but I may be permitted the hope they will be 
taken up by men conversant with the resources and re- 
quirements of the University, and careful for the interests 
of the country at large. 

I remain, my dear Sir, 

Yours sincerely. 

Max MtJLLER. 

Sm Robert Taylor's Institution, 
Oxford, 3Iay 16, 185 A. 



In publishing the second edition I have little to add 
beyond the expression of my thanks for the kind re- 
ception which these pages have met with. It will be seen 
that I have availed myself of some valuable remarks con- 
tained in the reviews with which this little Essay has been 
honoured in England, France, Germany, Sweden, and 
India. Errors have been here and there set right; al- 



XIII 



though in a work so discursive I am sensible, that others 
may probably yet remain undetected; and a few additions 
have been made. A statement by Professor Pott on the 
origin of the Albanian Language (kindly sent me by that 
eminent scholar), has been inserted, with some remarks 
for which I have to thank the Hon. H. Stanley, H. M. 
Secretary of Legation at Athens. And for some correc- 
tions in phraseology I am indebted to my friend Mr. 
Palgrave of Exeter College. 

It Avas impossible in this second edition to change the 
original plan of my essay, or make it a complete survey 
of the three great families of language. But I have lear- 
ned with much pleasure that, beyond its immediate ob- 
ject, it has been found useful as an introduction to Eth- 
nological study, and has gained the approbation of many 
of the highest authorities in Comparative Philology. 

Oxford, March, 4 855. 

M. M. 



PROPOSALS 



A MISSIONARY ALPHABET, 



SUBMITTED TO 



THE ALPHABETICAL CONFERENCES 

HELD AT THE RESIDENCE OF CHEVALIER BUNSEN IN 
JANUARY l8o4. 



PROPOSALS 



A MISSIONARY ALPHABET. 



The signs which we use to express the sounds of our 
own language, were originally invented in the East. They 
were adopted by the Greeks and Romans, and have now 
become, under various forms, the alphabet of the civi- 
lized nations of Europe. The twenty -two signs which 
originally constituted this ancient Alphabet, were not suffi- 
cient to express the numerous sounds which can be for- 
med by the organs of the human voice, and which the 
different nations of Asia and Europe have, in various 
proportions , allowed to enter into the formation of their 
languages and dialects. 

Two ways were open to remedy this defect. New 
signs could be invented to represent new sounds, or one 
and the same letter might be allowed to represent different 
sounds. The first plan has been adopted with great re- 
serve, and the number of new signs, whether entirely new, 
or formed by modification and composition, which the 
Greeks, the Romans, the Slavonic and Teutonic nations 
have added to the so-called Phenician Alphabet, is com- 
paratively small, while, if we look to the modern lan- 
guages of Europe, we shall find that in them there are 



XVIII 



but few letters which are restricted to but one pronun- 
ciation, a fact which in no language is felt more pain- 
fully than in English. Here one can hardly say that let- 
ters, which were originally intended to represent the 
sound of language, still answer this their original pur- 
pose. In pronouncing "thigh", we do not pronounce any 
one of the five letters according to their proper and ori- 
ginal power. The spelling of words is no longer pho- 
netic, but traditional. To call it etymological, would be 
a false compliment, since it is neither scientific nor 
systematic. The spelling which in English, as in all 
other languages, corresponded at some time or other, to 
the sound of words, has become stationary at various 
periods in the history of the English language, and it 
was entirely a matter of chance whether the form, fixed 
upon by literary tradition, preserved more of the etymo- 
logy or of the pronunciation. 

A reform is needed for the spelling of most mo- 
dern European languages, and it is extraordinary, that 
the art of writing, though belonging to the arts in 
which our times have achieved the greatest improvements, 
should have been allowed to remain in the same state in 
which it was three thousand years ago, with no altera- 
tions except for the worse. 

Whatever may be done in course of time by the 
different nations of Europe to ameliorate their own sys- 
tems of writing, it is clear that, with the defects pe- 
culiar to each, none could claim in its present state to 
be used as a standard system; and it would be wrong 
to smuggle any one of these imperfect systems of wri- 
ting into those languages of Africa, Australia or America 
which have not yet been reduced to alphabetical writing. 
The Missionary who brings the notion of an alphabet, 
together with more exalted ideas of religion, of law, of 
arts and sciences to the savage tribes of Africa, will be 
to them what Cecrops or Cadmus were to Greece. He 
must therefore not think of the present only , but of the 
future; he must see in his helpless converts the ancestors 
perhaps of mighty nations. He ought to remember that 



XIX 



the seed which he sows in the mind of these people will 
bear fruit a thousand fold; that it will yield many harvests, 
beside that of religion. Whatever objections may be urged 
against the adoption of a more rational and scientific alphabet 
for the languages of ancient Europe do not apply to the dia- 
lects of the new world of Africa or Australia. If our own 
case be hopeless, theirs is not, and what with us may 
remain the scientific alphabet of the student, can with 
them at once be carried into general practice. Nothing 
is more simple than what Mr. Ellis has well called the 
Alphabet of Nature; nothing more complicated than the 
Alphabet of Tradition. The following is an abstract of 
a scientific alphabet which was framed with a particular 
view to assist Missionaries in translating the Bible into 
the languages of savage and illiterate tribes; but it may 
be equally useful to the traveller and the philologist in 
collecting for scientific purposes the dialects of people 
which are little known and have not yet had their proper 
place assigned to them in the classification of languages. 
All strange and complicated types, all diacritical marks 
which embarrass the printer and dazzle the reader have 
been avoided, and the chief principle in arranging it has 
been the principle of all Missionary labours, to obtain 
the greatest results by the smallest means. Practical ex- 
perience has shown that this Missionary Alphabet 
answers the purpose for which it was intended, its employ- 
ment may therefore be recommended till it is superseded by 
a more perfect and more convenient system. A fuller account 
of the whole problem of alphabetical writing may be found in 
a very able Essay by Mr. Ellis, The Alphabet of Nature; 
and in the second volume of Chevalier Bunsen's Outlines 
of Universal History, applied to Language and Religion, 
Appendix D., The Universal Alphabet and the 
Conferences regarding it held at the Residence 
of Chev. Bunsen, in January 18 5 4. My own pro- 
posals for a Missionary Alphabet are there printed after 
the interesting account of the Standard Alphabet by Pro- 
fessor Lepsius. 



XX 



For the practical solution of the problem, ''How to 
establish one uniform system of notation which shall he 
acceptable to the scholar^ convenient to the missionary, 
and easy for the printer , '' we must consider three 
points : — 

I. Which are the principal sounds that can be formed 
with our organs of speech, and therefore may he ex- 
pected to occur in any of the dead or living dialects of 
mankind? 

This is a physiological question. 

II. How can these principal sounds, after proper clas- 
sificaiion, be expressed by us in writing and printing 
without obscuring their physiological value, and without 
creating new typograpJdcal difficulties? 

This is a practical question. 

III. How can this physiological alphabet be applied to 
existing languages, and 

III. a. to unwrHtteti dialects; 
Here the chief point is to catch the proper sound of 
the language as we hear it spoken by different individuals, 
to determine the character of every vowel and consonant, 
and to distinguish most carefully between accidental va- 
rieties of pronunciation, such as occur in the language of 
different individuals , and the general and permanent pro- 
nunciation of words. Much depends here on a good 
ear, and this can be acquired by practice. In expres- 
sing the sounds of a new language by the signs of the 
physiological alphabet, the missionary should be guided 
entirely by ear, without paying any regard to etymo- 
logical considerations, which are too apt to mislead even 
the most accomplished scholar. 

III. b. to written languages; 
In transcribing languages possessed of an historical 
orthography, and where, for reasons best known to the 
archaeologist, one sign may represent different sounds, 
and one sound be expressed by different signs, new and 
entirely distinct questions are involved, and capable of solu- 
tion by archaeological and philological research alone. We 
shall, therefore, discuss this part (III. b. ) separately. 



XXI 



and distinguish it by the name of Transliteration, 
from the usual method of transcribing as applied to 
unwritten tongues. 



Which are the principal Sounds that can be formed with 
our Organs of Speech, and therefore may he ex- 
pected to occur in any of the dead or living Dialects 
of Mankind? 

On the first point, which must form the basis of the 
whole, we have the immense advantage that all scholars 
who have written on it have arrived at results almost 
identically the same.* We are here still in the sphere 

* In a very able article by Professor Heise , in Hoefer's Zeit- 
schrift fiir Wissenschaft der Sprache, iv. \. 1853, the following 
authorities are quoted: — • 

Chladni, "Uber die Hervorbringung der menschlichen Sprach- 
laute, in Gilbert's Annalen der Physik. vol. Ixxvi. -1824. 

A. J. Ribbeck, Uber die Bildung der Sprachlaute. Berlin, 1848. 

K. M. Rapp, Versuch einer Physiologie der Sprache. Stutt- 
gardt, '1 836. 

H. E. Bindseil , Abhandlungen zur AUgemeinen Vergleichenden 
Sprachlehre. Hamburg, 1838. 

J. Miiller, Elements of Physiology. London, 1842. vol. ii. 
p. 1044. 

One of the earliest and best works on this subjectis. 

W. Holder, Elements of Speech : an Essay of Inquiry into the 
natural Production of Letters. London , 1 669. 

An excellent account of the researches of the most distinguished 
physiologists on the human voice , and the formation of letters , is 
found in Ellis, "The Alphabet of Nature;" a work full of accu- 
rate observations and original thought. 

Three very important essays have lately been published on the 
Alphabet, one by Professor R.Lepsius, "Das allgemeine linguistische 
Alphabet," Berlin 1855; the other by Professor Wilson in his 
learned introduction to his "Glossary of Indian Terms," Lon- 
don 1855; and a third by Wallin, "On the sounds of Ara- 
bic and their representation," printed after the death of this 
eminent Orientalist, in the Journal of the German Oriental Society, 
vol. IX, p. 1 — 69. Wallin was one of the few, if not the only 



XXII 



of physical science, where facts are arranged by obser- 
vation, and observation may be checked by facts so as to 
exclude individual impressions and national prejudice. 
The classification of vowels and consonants proposed by 
modern physiologists is, so far as general principles 
are concerned, exactly the same as that contained in 
Sanskrit grammars composed in the fifth century before 
Christ, and appended to the different collections of the 
sacred writings of the Brahmans, — the four Vedas. 
These grammatical treatises , called Pratisakhyas, exist 
in manuscript, and have not hitherto been published. 
The classification established by physiologists, as the re- 
sult of independent research, will receive the most 
striking confirmation by a translation of these writings, 
now more than two thousand years old. But, on their 
own account also , these phonetic treatises deserve to be 
published. Their observations are derived from a lan- 
guage (the Yaidik Sanskrit) which at that time was stu- 
died by means of oral tradition only, and where, in the 
absence of a written alphabet, the most minute differences 
of pronunciation had to be watched by the ear, and 
to be explained and described to the pupil. The language 
itself, the Sanskrit of that early period, had suffered less 
from the influence of phonetic corruption than any tongue 
from which ive can derive our observations; nay, the 
science of phonetics (Siksha), essential to the young 
theological student (Avho Avas not allowed to learn the 
Veda from MSS.), had been reduced to a more perfect 
system in the schools of the Brahmans , in the fifth cen- 
tury before Christ, than has since been anywhere effected. 
Our notions on the early civilisation of the East are of 
so abstract a nature that we must expect to be startled 
occasionally by facts like these. But we now pass on 
to the general question. 

European, who spoke Arabic so well that he was taken for an Arab 
by the Beduins. His account of the Arabic alphabet is therefore in- 
valuable, aud will necessitate many alterations in the systems of 
Arabic transliteration hitherto proposed. 



XXIII 



Consonants and Vowels. 

If we regard the human voice as a continuous stream 
of air, emitted as breath from the lungs and changed by 
the vibration of the chordae vocales into vocal sound 
as it leaves the larynx, this stream itself, as modified by 
certain positions of the mouth, would represent the vo- 
wels. "The vowels," as Professor Wheatstone says, 
*'are formed by the voice modified, but not interrupted, 
by the various positions of the tongue and the lips." In 
the consonants, on the contrary, we should have to re- 
cogTiise a number of stops opposing for a moment the 
free passage of this vocal stream. Hence the vowel is 
called by the Arabs motion (sS'y.:^)^ while the conso- 
nants are called barriers or edges (ov-^)** 

The consonants must again be divided into Mutae, full 
stops, and Semi-vocales, half-stops; the latter including 
the liquids, sibilants, and nasals. The Mutae prevent for a 
moment all emission of either voice or breath (k, g, t, d, 
p, b). The Semi-vocales allow a mere breathing to be heard 
in its various non- vocal modifications (h, y, 1, r, w; 
h, s, s, sh, f; n, m). This distinction which the Greeks 
expressed by oic^O'^OL and YjfjLicpova , is easily tested, for 
we find that we can breathe while pronouncing h, y, 1, 
r, w, s, sh, f, n, m; but a continued attempt to pro- 
nounce k, g, t, d, p, b, would end in suffocation. The 
consonantal stops, against which the waves of the vowels 
break themselves more or less distinctly, are produced 
by barriers formed by the contact of the tongue, the soft 
palate, the palate, the teeth, and the lips with each other. 
While English grammarians maintain that consonants can- 
not be pronounced without vowels, Arabic grammarians 
declare that vowels cannot be pronounced without a con- 
sonant. The former view is true if by vowel is meant 
not only vocal sounds, such as a, e, i, o, u, but also 
the Semi- vowels, including liquids, sibilants, and na- 

* Wallin, On the Arabic Alphabet, in the Journal of the German 
Oriental Society, vol. IX, p. 2. 



XXIV 



sals. The latter opinion may be defended, if we extend 
the nanae of consonant to what the Greeks call spiritus 
asper and lenis , for no vowel can be pronounced without 
at least that initial, slightly consonantal, element which 
we have in hear and ear. 



Consonants. 
Gutturals^ Dentals, and Labials. 

According to an observation which we find already 
in Vaidik grammars, the principal consonantal stops in 
any language are: ■ — 

the guttural (k), 
the dental (t), 
the labial (p). 

The pure guttural sound, without any regard as yet 
to its modifications (whether tenuis, media, aspirata, na- 
salis, liquida, flatus), is produced by stopping the stream 
of sound by means of a contact between the root of the 
tongue and the throat, or, more usually, the soft palate, 
or the velum pendulum. The throat is called the passive, 
the root of the tongue the active organ, of the guttural. 

The pure dental sound is produced by contact between 
tongue and teeth. Here the teeth are called the passive, 
and the tip of the tongue the active organ. 

The pure labial sound is produced by contact between 
the upper and lower lip ; the upper lip being the passive, 
the lower the active organ. 

All consonants , excluding liquids and sibilants or fla- 
tus, are formed by a complete contact between the active 
and passive organ. As the removal of this complete 
contact causes the voice to burst out with greater force, 
these consonants have sometimes been called explosive. 

Formation of the Tenuis. 

If the voice is stopped sharp by the contact of the 
organs, so as to allow for the moment no breath or 
sound to escape , the consonant is called tenuis (^ikov)-, 



XXV 



or hard (k, t, p). Arab grammarians remark very justly 
that the articulation of these consonants cannot be pro- 
longed, but is instantaneous. They compare them with 
the point in geometry. (Wallin , p. 1 1 .) 

Formation of the Media. 

If the voice is stopped less abruptly, so as to allow 
a kind of breathing to continue after the first contact has 
taken place, the consonant is called soft, or according 
to classical terminology, media ([jisGOv) or middle (g, 
d, b). The soft consonant does not arrest the sound 
at once, but allows it to be heard during a moment of 
resistance. 

The difference between a hard and soft consonant is 
best illustrated by a speaking -machine. "The sound p," 
as Professor Wheatstone says, "was produced by sud- 
denly removing the left hand from the front of the mouth, 
which it had previously completely stopped; the sound b, 
by the same action; but instead of closing the mouth 
completely, a very minute aperture was left, so that the 
sound of the reed might not be entirely stifled." This 
coincides fully with the description given by Mr. Ellis. 
"In pronouncing ba," he says, "the vowel is uttered 
simultaneously with the act of relieving the lips from con- 
tact, or rather before they are quite released. If we se- 
parate them before the vowel is uttered, allowing the 
breath to be condensed during a very brief space of time, 
the sound pa is heard. There is a similar distinction 
between ab and ap: in the former the effect of the voice 
remains throughout the consonant, and we may feel a 
slight tremor of the lips while it is being produced; in 
the latter the vowel, properly so called, entirely ceases 
before the contact is completed." 

Formation of Liquids. ^ 
If there is only an approach or a very slight contact 

" Although it is usual to call these letters semi - vowels , yet it 
seems better to keep that name as a general title of all non-mute 



XXVI 



between the organs, and the breathing is slightly stopped 
or compressed as it reaches the point of contact, the 
consonants are called liquid half- consonants or semi- 
vowels. They are soft like the mediae, owing to the 
process of their formation here described ('h, y, r, 
1, w). 

At the end of words and before a tenuis the liquid 
semi- vowels are frequently pronounced as a flatus, or 
they become evanescent. In the Dutch dag, we have the 
nearest approach to a guttural liquid, though in truth a gut- 
tural liquid is not to be distinguished from a guttural flatus 
lenis except in theory. If a Saxon pronounces the same 
word, he changes the d into t, and the guttural liquid 
into the guttural flatus asper, like ch in loch. In other 
parts of Germany, the final guttural is sounded as media 
or as tenuis , while in the English day the guttural liquid 
semi-vowel has become evanescent. The same process ex- 
plains the French sou instead of sol, and vaut instead of 
valet. In Sanskrit no liquid semi -vowel is tolerated at 
the end of words or before a tenuis. In Arabic the 
guttural liquid e, 'hain, if final, is frequently- changed 
into the guttural flatus asper , or followed by a slight 
vocal breathing. (See Wallin, p. 46, p. 50, N. 2 , and 
54, N. 1.) 

Professor Wheatstone's researches prove that a distin- 
guishing mark of the liquid semi -vowels consists in their 
having no corresponding mutes. This applies not only 
to y, r, 1, but also to w and 'h. 



Formation of Sibilants (flatus). 

If there is no contact at all, and the breath passes 
between the two organs without being stopped, still not 
without giving rise to a certain friction on passing that 
point of contact where guttural, dental, and labial con- 
consonants. In this sense v^fxtcptova was used by the Greeks, and it 
comprised liquids (uypa) , nasals, and sibilants. 



XXVII 



sonants are formed, we get the sibilants, or tlie "winds," 
as they are more properly called by Hindu grammarians. 
These are^ the pure breathing, without even a guttural 
modification, commonly called spiritus asper and lenis; 
the deep guttural flatus, sharp, as in loch, mild as in 
the German tage; the original palatal flatus, sharp as 
in the German ich, mild as in the German taglich; 
the assibilated palatal flatus, sharp as in sharp, mild as 
in pleasure; the sharp and soft s for the dentals; and 
the sharp and soft f for the labials. The sibilants or 
flatus are distinguished from all other consonants by this, 
that with them a breathing is freely emitted, while all other 
consonants offer more or less impediment to the emission 
of sound or breath. A candle applied to the mouth will 
at once show the difference between the labial flatus 
asper, as in find, and the consonantal stops, such as 
p, b, or even the liquid semi-vowel, as heard in wind. 
The b will produce no disturbance in the flame; the p 
shows its explosive nature by displacing the flame for a 
moment; the w affects the flame considerably, and the f 
generally extinguishes it. 

As we distinguished between tenuis and media in the 
consonants, we must admit a twofold intonation for the 
flatus or the sibilants also. A flatus or sibilant cannot 
be modified exactly in the same manner as a consonant 
produced by contact; but, by an analogous process, it 
may become either asper or lenis, sharp or soft. We 
are best acquainted with this distinction in the primitive 
and unmodified breathing which necessarily precedes an 
initial vowel. The spiritus asper and lenis in Greek are 
modifications of that initial breathing which is inherent 
in every vowel sound at the beginning of a word or of 
a syllable. It comes out freely as the spiritus asper in 
Homer and opoc, frontier, while it is tempered and to 
our ears hardly audible in 'Aristotle and opO(;, hill. We 
can more easily perceive what is meant by the Spiritus 
lenis inherent in every unaspirated initial vowel, if we 
pronounce blacking and black ink. In blacking, 
the vowel i is introduced by the second half of the 



XXVIIT 



preceding k, in black ink, the i is ushered in by 
the spiritus lenis. This spiritus lenis is the Hamzeh of 
the Arabs, which stands to the spiritus asper ^ in the 

same relation as c to — , c to -^, \ to (j^, ^ to o. 

The Hamzeh cannot be called an explosive letter. Its 
sound is produced by the opening of the larynx, but 
there is no previous effort of closing the larynx which 
alone could be said to give in an explosive character. It 
has well been compared with the more involuntary nictus 
oculi, which is perhaps the original meaning of Hamzeh. 
(Wallin, p. 64.) In ancient languages the spiritus asper is 
frequently represented by the flatus of another class, such 
as s and f, and the spiritus lenis by a liquid semi-vowel, 
as, for instance, the Digamma JEolicum w, or the y. 

If, instead of allowing the pure pectoral breathing to 
be heard as in hand, we cause it to assume a harsher 
sound, by elevating the root of the tongue against the 
uvula and thus narrowing the passage of the breath, we 
have what may be called a guttural flatus asper, as heard 
in loch. The corresponding sonant or mild flatus is of 
rare occurrence, but it may be heard in some parts of 
Germany in words like tage. 

The Arabs do not form their guttural flatus so high 
in the throat as the German ch in loch, at least not 
regularly (see Wallin, p. 35); but they admit between the 
pure and almost uninterrupted breathing of 5, h, and the 
point of guttural contact where k is formed, two inter- 
mediate stations, where by compressing the passage of 
the throat, two guttural flatus are formed, the ~ and -^, 
Avith their corresponding sonant representatives, ^ and 6. 
The — ^ is formed so low in the throat, that here a 
contact and explosion would be impossible; hence there 
is no tenuis corresponding to —. as little as to 5. The 
-^ is formed higher in the throat, and occasions, it is 

said, a friction between the root of the tongue and the 
lowest part of the palate. It is not, however, .the Ger- 



XXIX 



man ch, and according to Mr. Eli Smith should be 
defined as a breathing whose sound is modified by a 
tremulous motion of the epiglottis, and not by its striking 
against the palate as in the German ch in loch. 

In none of these there stages, that of the S, the -^, 
and ^, is it possible to distinguish between the flatus 
lenis and the corresponding liquid , unless we ad- 
mit the opinion of some Arabic grammarians who 
look upon the | as a liquid semi -vowel, distinct from 

the I (see Wallin, p. 3, N. 1, 22, 24); a view which may 
be true in theory, but is of no practical importance. 

The fourth degree of flatus, after the spiritus asper 
and the two Semitic guttural breathings — and ^ , would 

be the European guttural ch as in loch. Next to it 
would follow the palatal flatus as heard in ich; and after 
this the assibilated palatal flatus as heard in sharp, 
corresponding in place with the palatal tenuis and liquid; 
as heard in church and yea. 

The dental flatus, as a tenuis, or rather as a flatus 
asper, is heard in sin and seal; while the media or 
flatus lenis is rendered by the English z, as in zeal and 
breeze. 

The sharp labial flatus is the pure f , which the Greeks 
could not pronounce, and which we hear in find and 
life. The flat corresponding sound is heard in vin e and live. 
This also is a difficult letter to pronounce, and is therefore 
avoided by many people, or changed into b, as Scaliger said, 

"Haud temere antiquas mutat Vasconia voces, 
Cui nihil est aliud vivere quam bibere." 

Strictly speaking, and in accordance with our own 
definitions, every consonant at the end of a word, unless 
followed by a slight exhalation such as is heard in drug, 
loud, sob, must become a tenuis. Now, if we take 
words where the final consonant is a flatus asper but 
where, by the addition of a derivative syllable, the flatus 
ceases to be really final , we shall see distinctly how the 



XXX 

flatus asper and lenis interchange. The sharp dental fla- 
tus is heard in grass and grease. Here the s is really 
linal, although an e is put at the end of grease. If we 
form the two verbs, to graze and to grease, we have 
the corresponding flat s, the common German s. Exactly 
the same grammatical process applied to the labial flatus 
changes life into live, i. e. the sharp labial flatus into 

the flat, and it accounts for the Arabic aiiji anqa'h and 
^^^ bi'ht being pronounced liijf, anqa'h and ^^^^j, 

bfht. (Wallin, p. 46.) 

Some languages, as, for instance, Sanskrit, acknow- 
ledge none but sharp sibilants; and even a media, if 
followed by a flatus is changed in vSanskrit into a tenuis. 

Formation of Nasals. 

If, in the three organs, a full contact takes place 
and the vocal breathing is stopped, not abruptly, but in 
the same manner as with the sonant letters, and if after- 
wards the breathing be emitted, not through the mouth, 
but through the nose, we get the three full nasal con- 
sonants ng, n, and m, for the guttural, dental, and la- 
bial series. A speaking -machine leaves no doubt as to 
the manner in which a tenuis may be changed into a 
narisonant letter. "M," as Professor Wheatstone says, 
"was heard on opening two small tubes representing the 
nostrils, placed between the wind -chest and the mouth, 
while the front of the mouth was stopped as for p." 

In most cases the peculiar character of the nasal is 
determined by the consonant immediately following, In 
ink, the n is necessarily guttural; and if we try to pro- 
nounce it as a dental or labial, we have to stop after 
the n, and the transition to the guttural k becomes so 
awkward that, even in words like to in -cur, most people 
pronounce the n like a guttural. No language, as far as 
I know, is fond of such incongruities as a guttural n 



XXXI 



followed by any but guttural consonants, and they ge- 
nerally sacrifice etymology to euphony. In English we 
cannot pronounce em-ty, and therefore we pronounce 
and write emp-ty. In the Uraon-Kol language, which 
is a Tamulian dialect, en an is I, and the possessive 
prefix is in, my. But in the Journal of the Asiatic 
Society" of Bengal we find im-bas, my father; but 
ing-kos, my child. Cicero alludes to the same where 
he speaks of the n adulterinum. He says, that cum 
nobis was pronounced like cun nobis. 

At the end of words and syllables, however, the three 
nasal sounds, guttural, dental, or labial, may occur in- 
dependently; and as it is necessary to distinguish a final 
m from a final n (aya'^ov, bomwi)^ it wall be advisable 
also to do the same for a final guttural nasal, as the 
French bon, Lundi, or the English to sing. It is 
true that in most languages the final guttural nasal becomes 
really a double consonant, i. e. n -j- g, as in sing; 
still, as the pronunciation on this point varies, it will 
be necessary to provide a distinct category, and after- 
wards a distinct sign, for the guttural nasal. 

In some languages we meet even with an initial gut- 
tural nasal, as in Tibetan nga-rang, I tnyself. Whether 
here the initial sound is really so evanescent as to require 
a different sign from that which we have as the final 
letter in "rang", is a question which a native alone could 
answer. Certain it is that in the Tibetan alphabet itself 
both are written by the same sign, while Csoma de 
Koros writes the initial guttural n by n, the final by ng; 
as iia-rang. 

We have now, on physiological grounds, established 
the following system of consonants: 

MUTAE. SeMIVOCALES. 

Tenues. Mediae. Liquidse. Flatus sibilantes: Nasales. 
asperi. lenes. 

Gutturales : k (kirk) g (go) 'h (dag) 'h (loch) 'h (tage) n (sing). 

Dentales: t(town) d (do) 1 (low) s (seal) z (zeal) n (sin). 

Labiales: p (pint) b (bring) w (win) f (life) v (live) m (sum). 

Spiritus asper: ' or h (hear). 

Spiritus lenis: ' (ear). 



XXXIl 



Formation of Aspirates. 

According to Sanskrit grammarians, if we begin to 
pronounce the tenuis, but, in place of stopping it abruptly, 
allow it to come out with what they call the correspon- 
ding "wind" (flatus, wrongly called sibilans), we produce 
the aspirata^ as a modified tenuis, not as a double con- 
sonant. This however, is admissible for the tenuis aspi- 
rata only, and not for the media aspirata. Other gram- 
marians, therefore, maintain that all mediae aspiratae are 
formed by pronouncing the mediae with a final 'h, the 
flatus lenis being considered identical with the spiritus: 
and they insist on this principally because the aspirated 
mediae could not be said to merge into , or terminate by, 
a hard sibilant. Accepting this view of the formation of 
these aspirates, to which we have no corresponding sounds 
in English, we may now represent the complete table of 
the chief consonantal sounds possible in any dialect, as 
follows : — 

Tenuis. Tenuis Media. Media Liquidas. Flatus Nasales. 







aspir. 




aspir. 




sibilantes. 




Guttural : 


k 


k/i 


g 


gh 


'h 


'h. 'h 


ng 


Dental : 


t 


t/i 


d 


dh 


1 


s z 


n 


Labial : 


P 


Vh 


b 


hh 


w 
Spiritus 


f V 

: h '— 


m 



It should be remarked that in the course of time the 
fine distinctions between k/z, g/z, and 'h, between p/?, hh, 
and f, become frequently merged in one common sound. 
In Sanskrit only, and in some of the southern languages 
of India, through the influence of Sanskrit, the distinction 
has been maintained. Instead of Sanskrit th we find in 
Latin the simple t; instead of d/i, the simple d, or, as 
a nearer approach, the f ( d/mma = fumus , &c.). The 
etymological distinction maintained in Sanskrit between 
dha^ to put, to create, and da^ to give, is lost in Per- 
sian , because there the two initial sounds d and dh have 
become one, and the root da has taken to itself the 
meaning both of creating and giving. Whatever objections, 



XXXllI 



therefore, might be raised against the anticipated represen- 
tation^ of the tenuis and media aspirata by means of an 
additional h or h, they would practically apply only to 
a very limited sphere of languages. In Sanskrit no scho- 
lar could ever take kh for k + ^^ because the latter 
combination of sounds is grammatically impossible. In 
the Tamulic languages the fine distinctions introduced into 
their orthography have hardly found their way into the 
spoken dialects of the people at large. 



Modifications of Guttm^als and Dentals. 

From what has been said before on the formation of 
the guttural and dental sounds, it must be clear that the 
exact place of contact by which they are j)roduced can 
never be fixed with geometrical precision, and that by 
shifting this point forward or backward certain modifica- 
tions will arise in the pronunciation of individuals, tribes, 
or nations. The point of contact between the lips is not 
liable to the same changes, and the labials are, therefore, 
the most constant sounds in all dialects. 

A. Dialectic Modifications of Gutturals and Dentals. 

Where this variety of pronunciation exists only in 
degree, without affecting the nature and real character 
of a guttural or dental consonant, we need not notice 
it. Gutturals from a Semitic throat have a deeper 
sound than our own , and some grammarians have made 
a new class for them by calling them pectoral letters. 
The guttural flatus asper, as heard in the Swiss ach is 
deeper, and as it were more pectoral, than the usual 
German ch: but this is owing to a peculiarity of the 
organs of speech; and whatever letter might be chosen to 
represent this Swiss ch in a phonetic alphabet, it is 
certain no European, but a Swiss could ever pronounce it. 
This Swiss ch is, according to Wallin, pag. 2'i , the 
same as the Arabic ^■> for none of the Arabic gut- 
turals, neither S, _^, or ^, corresponds to the German ch. 



XXXIV 



But although there is a distinction between the ch as heard in 
loch, and the -^ and ^ of the Arabs, as described above, 
yet it is not necessary to admit more than one type of the gut- 
tural flatus asper. In a European throat this flatus asper will 
sound like the German ch. In a Semitic throat both -^ and ^ 
will differ from this ch, but it will be sufficient to have 
one sign for the simple guttural flatus of a Semitic organ, 
the — ; and to mark the ^ diacritically as in the Arabic 
alphabet. Sanskrit grammarians sometimes regard h as 
formed in the chest (urasya), while they distinguish the 
other gutturals by the name of tongue - root letters 
(pihvamuliya). These refinements, however, are of no 
practical use; because, in dialects where the guttural 
sound is affected and diverted from its purer intonation, 
we generally find that the pure sound is lost altogether; 
so that the two hardly ever co- exist in the same lan- 
guage. The Swiss who pronounces his ch avoids the 
common German ch in loch. The Arab who pronounces 
^ and ^^ entirely ignores the German ch. 

The same applies to the so - called Linguals ol the 
Sanskrit and the Arabic alphabets. It is true that there 
is a difference between the Sanskrit C and the Arabic is^ 
In the former the tongue is more contracted than in the 
latter, but both are produced by contact between the 
tongue, more or less contracted, and the palate. Their 
difference is so slight that here again an organ which 
is able to form the Sanskrit lingual is generally unsuccessful 
in the formation of the Arabic lingual. In Hindustani there- 
fore where owing to the mixture of Arabic and Sanskrit words, 
both letters occur, no difference is made between the two. 
(Wilson, Indian terms, p. XVI.) It will be seen that 
native Arabic grammarians, though admitting 17 places 
of articulation, assign the same place or passive organ 
to ^c:.?, O, and is. The distinction between Arabic dentals 
and linguals has therefore been avoided altogether in our 
system of transliteration, and we have preferred to re- 
gard the superlative degree of explosiveness in the ^, 



XXXV 



as well as in the low guttural ij', and the Ethiopic pait, 
as the characteristic peculiarity of these letters, and 
endeavoured to indicate it in our transcription. 



B. Specific Modifications of Gutturals and Dentals. 

1. Palatals as Modifications of Gutturals. 

But the place of contact of the gutturals may be 
pushed forward so far as to lie no longer in the throat, 
but in the palate. This change has taken place in almost 
all languages. Latin cantus is still canto in Italian, 
but in English chant. In the same manner, the guttural 
tenuis in the Latin vocs {vox) has been softened in 
Sanskrit into the sound of the English ch, at least where 
it is followed by certain letters. Thus we have: 

vach -f- mi, / speak. 

but vak -!•- shi, thou speakest, 

-vak -)- ti, he speaks. 

The same applies to the media. Latin largus is 
Italian largo, but English large. The Latin guttural 
media g in jungo is softened in Sanskrit into the sound 
of the English j. We have Sanskrit yuga, Latin ju gum; 
but in the verb we have: 

yunaj 4- mi, I join. 

yunak -f- shi, thou joinest. 

yunak -}- ti, he joins. 

Wallin in his paper "On the pronunciation of Ara- 
bic", gives the following description of an analogous 
change of k into k. "Certain tribes particularly among 
the most genuine Beduins in Negd and 'Irak, among the 
more- southern '^Enere -Nomads, and in the neighbourhood 
of Jerusalem, pronounce k (;J) like ksh, a peculiarity 
which in ancient times was pointed out as belonging to the 
tribe of Rabi'^. Another pronunciation, though of indi- 
viduals rather than of tribes, is that which gives to 
k the sound of ks , and this also is mentioned by ancient 
authors as a distinguishing feature of the tribe of Bakr. 



XXXVI 



Again by changing the k to t, the sound of k lapses into 
tsh and ts. The sound of sh and s, however, is so slight 
and coalesces so entirely with the k and t, that the ear 
perceives but a single sound, nay that it is difficult to 
say whether we hear tsh, ts, or ty." — Likewise the 
guttural media varies in different Semitic dialects between 
the sound of g and j. It is only in Egypt, Hejaz, 
and in Southern Arabia that it retains its pure guttural 
^sound; elsewhere it has become palatal. 

The identity of many Avords in Latin and Sanskrit be- 
comes palpable at once, if, instead of writing this modi- 
fied guttural, or, as we may now call it, palatal sound, 
by a new type, we write it by a modified A". Sanskrit 
chatvar, or as some write ts chat war, does not look 
like quatuor; but Lithuanian keturi and Sanskrit A;atvar 
speak for themselves. Sanskrit cha or tscha does not 
look like Latin que; but Greek xs and Sanskrit A^a assert 
their relationship without disguise. Although, therefore, 
we are forced to admit the palatals, as a separate class, 
side by side with the gutturals, because most languages 
retain both sets and use them for distinct etymological 
and grammatical purposes , still it will be well to remem- 
ber that the palatals are more nearly related to the gut- 
turals than to any other class, and that in most languages 
the two are still interchangeable. 

That the pronunciation of the palatals may vary again, 
like that of the gutturals, hardly requires to be stated. Some 
people imagine they perceive a difference between the 
English palatal in church, and the Italian palatal in 
cielo, and they maintain that no Englishman can pro- 
perly pronounce the Italian palatal. If so , it only proves 
what was said before, that slight modifications like these 
do never co- exist in the same language; that English has 
but one, and Italian but one palatal, though the two may 
slightly differ. Thus even if we invented a special letter 
to represent the Italian palatal , no one except an Italian 
would be able to pronounce it, not even for his life, as 
the French failed in "ceci" and "ciceri" at the time of 
the Sicilian Vespers. All consonants, therefore, between 



XXXVII 



gutturals and dentals, should be called palatals. That 
palatals have again a tendency to become dentals , may 
be seen from words like Tzacxgec instead of Sanskrit 
Aatvoras or Lithuanian ketnri. 

Frequently the pronunciation of the palatals becomes 
so broad that they seem, and in some cases really are, 
double consonants. Some people pronounce "church" 
(kirk) as if it were written "tchurtch." If this pronun- 
ciation becomes sanctioned, and we have to deal with a 
language which has as yet no historical orthography, it 
must be left to the ear of the missionary to determine 
whether he hears distinctly two consonants, or one only 
though pronounced rather fully and broadly. If he hears 
distinctly the two sounds t -[" ^^t ^s in pitching, or 
t -f- sh, as in the German rutschen, he should 
write both, particularly if in the same language there 
exists another series of letters with the simple palatal sound. 
This is the case, for instance, in Tibetan and its nume- 
rous dialects. If, therefore, the missionary has to deal 
with a Bhotiya dialect, which has not yet been fixed by 
the Tibetan alphabet, the simple palatals should be kept 
distinct from the compound palatals, tsh, dsh, &c. In 
the literary language of Tibet, Avhere the Sanskrit alpha- 
bet has been adopted, an artificial distinction has been 
introduced, and the compound sounds, usually transcribed 
as tsh, tsh/i, and dsh, are distinguished by a diacritical 
mark at the top from the simple palatals, the sound of 
which is described as like the English ch in church, and 
j in join. How this artificial distinction should be ren- 
dered in transliteration, will have to be considered under 
III. b. If we have once the palatal tenuis, the same mo- 
difications as those described above give us the palatal 
media, the two aspirates, the nasal, the liquid, and the sibilant. 

The sound of the tenuis is given in the English 
church; of the media, in join. The liquid we have 
in the pronunciation of yea. The nasal again hardly 
exists by itself, but only if followed by palatals. We 
have it in inch and injure. Where the Spaniards use 
an n, they write a double by a simple sound; for the 



XXXYIII 



sound is the nasal followed by the corresponding semi- 
vowel, ny. The French express the same sound in a 
different manner. The French besogne, if it occurred 
in an African language, would have to be expressed by 
the missionary as bezonye. 

As to the palatal flatus or sibilant, we must distin- 
guish again between its sharp and mild sound. The sharp 
sound is heard in sharp, or French chose. The mild sound 
is less known in English, but of frequent occurrence in 
French; such as je, and joli, very different from the 
English jolly. It is a sound of frequent occurrence in 
African languages.* The difference between the sharp 
and mild palatal flatus may best be illustrated by a re- 
ference to the modern languages of Europe. A guttural 
tenuis in Latin becomes a palatal tenuis in English, and 
a palatal sibilant in French; cantus, the chant, le 
chant. Here, the palatal being originally a tenuis, the 
initial sibilant in French is asper or sharp like the Eng- 
lish sh in she. A guttural media in Latin becomes a 
palatal media in English, and a palatal sibilant in French; 
elegia, the elegy, I'elegie. Here the sibilant sound 
of the French g is the same as in genou or je; it is 
the mild palatal sibilant, sometimes expressed in English 
by s, as in pleasure. 

It should be remarked, however, that the proper, and 
not yet assibilated sound of the palatal flatus asper is 
not the French ch as heard in Chine, but rather the Ger- 
man ch in China, madchen, ich, orginkonig. Both 
sounds are palatal according to our definition of this term; 
but the German might be called the simple, the French 
the assibilated palatal flatus. Ellis calls the former the 
"whispered guttural sibilant," aud remarks that it is ge- 
nerally preceded by a vowel of the i class. The correspon- 
ding "spoken consonant" also, or the flatus lenis, was 
discovered by Ellis in such words as the German kon'ge. 

* See the Rev. Dr. Ivrapf's "Outhne of the Elements of the 
Kisuaheh Language : " Tiibingen, 1830 , page 23. 



XXXIX 



2. Linguals as Modifications of Dentals. 
While the pure dental is produced by bringing the tip 
of the tongue straight against the teeth, a peculiarly mo- 
dified and rather obtuse consonantal sound is formed if 
the tongue is curled back till its tip is at the root, and 
the roof of the mouth then struck with its back or under- 
surface. The consonants produced by this peculiar pro- 
cess differ from the dentals, both by their place and by 
their instrument, and it has been common in languages 
where these peculiar consonants occur to call them "lin- 
guals." Although this name is not quite distinct, the 
tongue being the agent in the palatals and dentals as well 
as in these linguals, still it is preferable to another name 
which has also been applied to them, Cerebrals — a mere 
mistranslation of the Sanskrit name "Mi^rdd/ianya.'"'^ These 
linguals vary again in the degree of obtuseness imparted to 
them in different dialects, a difference which evades graphical 
representation. All letters that cease to be pure dentals 
by shifting the point of contact backward from the teeth, 
must be considered as linguals; and many languages, 
Semitic as well as Arian, use them for distinct etymo- 
logical purposes. As with the palatals, we have with the 
linguals also a complete set of modified consonants. The 
lingual teuuis, tenuis aspirata, media, media aspirata, and 
nasal have no corresponding sounds in English, because, 

* "Murddhanya," being derived from "mwrddhan," head or top^ 
was a technical name given to these letters , because their place was 
the top or highest point in the dome of the palate, the oupavo? of the 
Greeks. The proper translation would have been " Cacuminals." 
"Cerebrals" is wrong in every respect; for no letter is pronounced 
by means of the brain, nor does "mi/rddhan" mean brain. It is 
not advisable to retain this name , even as a technical term , after it 
has been proved to owe its origin to a mere mistranslation. It is 
a word which has given rise to confused ideas on the nature of the 
lingual letters, and it ought therefore to be discarded from philological 
treatises, though the mistranslation and its cause have hitherto failed to 
attract the observation of either Sanskrit or comparative grammarians. 
Even native grammarians in India have been imposed upon by this 
name, and the author of one of the best Bengali Grammars says, "the 
letters of the third division, though called cerebral in Sanskrit, are in 
Bengali expressed from the middle or hinder part of the palate," 



XL 



as we shall see, the English organ has modified the dental 
sounds by a forward and not by a backward movement. 
The liquid is the lingual r, produced by a vibration of 
the curled tongue in which the Italians and Scotch excel, 
and which we find it difficult to imitate. The English 
and the German r become mostly guttural, while, on the 
other hand, the Semitic guttural flatus lenis fricatus the 
'/iain, takes frequently the sound of a guttural r. It might 
be advisable to distinguish between a guttural and a lingual r; 
but most organs can only pronounce either the one or the 
other, and the two therefore seldom co-exist in the same dialect. 

The lingual sibilant is a sound peculiar to the Sanskrit; 
and as, particularly in modern Indian dialects, it inter- 
changes with the guttural tenuis aspirata, its pronuncia- 
tion seems to have partaken of a certain guttural flatus. 

There is a peculiarity in the pronunciation of the 
dental tenuis aspirata and media aspirata, which, though 
it exists but in few languages, deserves to be noticed 
here. In most of the spoken idioms of Europe, although 
a distinction is made in writing, there is hardly any 
difference in the pronunciation of t aud t/z, or d and dh. 
The German thun, to do, the French theologie, are 
pronounced as if they were written tun, teologie. In 
the Low German and Scandinavian dialects, however, the 
aspiration of the t and d (according to Grimm's law, an 
organic aspiration) has been preserved to a certain extent, 
only the consonantal contact by which they are produced 
takes place no longer between the tongue and the inside 
of the teeth, but is pushed forward so as to lie really 
between the tongue and the edge of the teeth. This po- 
sition of the organs produces the two well-known con- 
tinuous sounds of th, in think and though. There is 
a distinct Runic letter to express them, p; and in later 
MSS. a graphical distinction is introduced between ]} and ^, 
tenuis and media. The difference between the tenuis and 
media is brought out most distinctly by the same experi- 
ment which was tried for s and z, for f and v. (page 27.). 
We have the tenuis in breath, but it is changed into 
media in to breathe. 



xLr 



We may consider these two sounds as dialectical va- 
rieties of the real th and d/z, which existed in Sanskrit, 
but which, like most aspirated sonant and surd conso- 
nants, have since become extinct. To many people the 
pronunciation of the English th is an impossibility; and 
in no dialect, except perhaps the Irish, does the English 
pronunciation of the th coexist with the pure and simple 
pronunciation of th and dh. Still, as their sound is very 
characteristic 5 approaching almost to a sibilant flatus, it 
might be desirable to mark it in writing, so that even 
those who do not know the peculiar accent and pronun- 
ciation of a language, should be able to distinguish by 
the eye the English sound of the th from the original 
th and dh. 

The principal consonantal sounds , without any regard 
as yet to their graphic representation, may now be clas- 
sified and defined as follows. Where possible, the approxi- 
mate sound is indicated by English words. 



1. Gutturals 

2. Palatals 

3. Dentals 

4. Linguals 

5. Labials 


a. 

Te- 
nuis. 


b. 

Tenuis 
aspi- 
rata. 


c. 

Me- 
dia. 


d. 

Media 
aspirata. 


e. 
Nasalis. 


f. 

Liquida. 


9- 

Flatus 
(sibilans). 

asper. lenis. 


kite 
church 
tan 
pan 


(breath) 


gate 
join 
dock 

bed 


(breathe) 


sing 
Fr. signe 
not 

mUl ~ 


dag{Dutch) 

yet 

let 

run 

will 


hear , ear. 
loch, Germ. tage. 
Och,Germ.taglich. 
^sharp, Fr. je. 
grass , graze. 

life, live. 



Vowels. 
The Physiological Scale of Vowels. 

If we recall the process by which the liquids were 
formed in the three principal classes, and if, instead of 
stopping the vocal sound by means of that slight remnant 
of consonantal contact or convergence which characterized 
the formation of the liquid semi -vowels, we allow 



XLII 



the full volume of breath to pass over the point of con- 
tact and there to vibrate and sound, we get three pure 
vowel sounds, guttural, palatal, and labial, which can 
best be expressed by the Italian A, 1^ U, as heard in 
psalm, ravine, flute. 

Formation of the Labial Vowel. 

Let us attempt to pronounce the labial liquid, the 
English w in win, and, instead of stopping or compres- 
sing the breathing as it approaches the labial point of 
contact, emit it vibrating and vocalised, through the 
rounded aperture of the lips, and we have the vowel u. 

Formation of the Palatal Vowel. 

The same process which changes vv into u, changes 
the palatal liquid y into i. Let us pronounce the y in 
yea without any vowel after it, and it will be seen that 
it requires only the removal of that stoppage of sound 
which takes place between tongue and palate, before the 
vowel i, as in ravine, can be heard distinctly. 

Formation of the Guttural Vowel. 

Let us pronounce the spiritus lenis as in arm, or the 
guttural liquid as heard in the Dutch dag or the Hebrew 
'hain, and, if we try to replace this liquid gradually by 
the vowel a, we feel that what we effect is merely the 
removal of that stoppage which in the formation of the 
liquid takes place at the very point of guttural contact. 

The vowels, as was said before, are formed by the 
voice modified, but not interrupted, by the various posi- 
tions of the tongue and the lips. "Their differences de- 
pend," as Professor Wheatstone adds, " on the proportions 
between the aperture of the lips and the internal cavity 
of the mouth , which is altered by the different elevations 
of the tongue." 



XLIII 



Succession of Vowels ^ natural and artificial. 

The organic succession of vowel sounds is the same 
as for consonants, — guttural, palatal, labial, a, i, u. 
Professor Willis*, has described an interesting experiment 
as to the scale of vowels in the abstract. The gradual 
lengthening of a cylindrical tube joined to a reed organ- 
pipe was found to produce the following series of sounds : 

i, e, a, aw, o, u. 

beat, bait, bath, bought, boat, boot. 

But as these pipes are round and regular, while the con- 
struction of the pipe formed by larynx, throat, palate, 
jaws, and lips is not, the succession of vowels given by 
these pipes cannot be expected to correspond with the 
local succession of vowels as formed by the organs 
of speech. 

Kempelen states that if we pay attention to the succes- 
sive contraction of the throat only, we shall find, that 
the aperture of the throat is smallest if we pronounce 
i, and that it gradually increases as we go on to 
e, a, o, u; while if we pay attention to the successive 
contraction of the lips , which is quite as essential to the 
formation of the vowels as the contraction of the throat, 
the scale of vowels is a different one. Here the aperture 
of the lips is largest if we pronounce the a; and it gra- 
dually decreases as we go on to the e, i, o, and u. 

Hence, if we represent the opening of the lips by 
Roman, and the opening of the throat by English figures, 
taking the smallest aperture as our unit , we may, accord- 
ing to Kempelen, represent the five vowels in a mathe- 
matical progression: 

i=ni. 1. e=IV.2, a=V.8. o=.n.4. u = L 5. 

It has been remarked by Professor Purkinje, that the 
conditions for the formation of some of the vOAvels, par- 

* Transactions of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, vol. 
iii. paper 10. 1828 — 29. 



XLIV 



ticularly of a and e, as heard in far and name, have 
not been quite correctly stated by Kempelen. The pro- 
duction of both these sounds depends principally on the 
form of the cavity of the throat between the root of the 
tongue and the larynx ; in both cases this space is large, 
but largest in the pronunciation of e. The size of the 
opening of the mouth is the same in the two cases; not 
different, as Kempelen states. The position which he 
ascribes to the lips in pronouncing o is unnecessary."^' 

As to the experiments of Professor Willis, they show that, 
if we look on the instrument by which the vowels are formed 
as a vibrating membranous tongue, with one tube pre- 
fixed, and another added below the tongue, the shortest 
length of the tube gives i; the longest, u; and an inter- 
mediate one, a. But as the human organ of speech is 
not a regular tube, we must insist on this, that in the 
mouth the greatest length of the tube is indicated by the point 
of guttural contact, the smallest by the point of labial, and 
the intermediate by the point of guttural contact; and 
that it is by the simultaneous operation of the guttural 
and labial apertures that the vowels a, i, and u are 
formed. Whether there may not be at the same time in the 
human organ a cooperating difference of pitch in the 
chordse vocales, is a question which can only be deter- 
mined by anatomical experiments. 

The Lingual aiid Dental Vowels. 

Besides the three vowels struck at the guttural, pala- 
tal, and labial points of contact, the Sanskrit, in strict 
analogy, forms two peculiar vowels as modifications of 
the lingual and dental semi -vowels. R and L^ subjected 
to the same process whieh changes 'or 'h into a, y into 
i, and w into u, become ri, li, or re and le. At least 
these sounds ri and li, approach as near to the origi- 
nal value of the Indian vowels as with our alphabet we 
can express it. According to their origin, they may be 
described as r and 1 opened and vocalised. 

* See J. Miiller, Elements of Physiology, p. iOiT- 



XLV 



Umnodijied Vowels. 

If we attempt in singing to pronounce no particular 
vowel, we still hear for a time the vowel -sound of the 
Italian a. This vowel expresses the quality of the mu- 
sical vibrations emitted from the human larynx and na- 
turally modified by a reverberation of the palate. But if 
we arrest the vibrations before they pass the guttural 
point of contact — if, either in a whispered or a voca- 
lised shape, we emit the voice without allowing it to 
strike against any part of the throat or mouth — we hear 
the unmodified and primitive sound as in but, bird, 
lull. It is the sound which, in Professor Willis's ex- 
periments, "seems to be the natural vowel of the reed," 
or, according to Mr. Ellis, "the voice in its least modi- 
fied form." We hear it also if we take the larynx of a 
dead body, and blow through it while compressing the 
chordae vocales. 

In these experiments it is impossible to distinguish 
more than one sound; and most people admit but one 
unmodified vowel in English. According to Sir John 
Herschel, there is no difference in the vowels of the 
words spurt, assert, dirt, virtue, dove, double, 
blood. Mr. Ellis considers the u in cur as the cor- 
responding long vowel. Other writers, however, as She- 
ridan and Smart, distinguish between the sounds of bird 
and work, of whirl'd and world; and in some lan- 
guages this difference requires to be expressed. It is a 
very delicate difference, but may be accounted for by a 
slight palatal and labial pressure through which this obscure 
sound is affected after having escaped the guttural re- 
verberation. 

In English every vowel is liable to be absorbed by 
this obscure sound; as beggar, offer, bird, work, 
hut. It is sometimes pronounced between two conso- 
nants, though not expressed in writing; as in el-m, 
mar-sh, schis-m, ryth-m. Here it is really the breath 
inherent in all continuous consonants. In French it is the 
e muet, as in entendre, Londres. In German it is 



XLVI 



doubtful whether the same sound exists at all, though 1 
think it may be heard occasionally in such words as 
leber, leb^n. 

Quantity of Vowels. 
All vowels may be short or long, with the exception 
of the unmodified breathing (Rapp's ''Urlaut"), which, 
at least according to some authorities, is always short. 

The sound of the long a we have in psalm, messa (It.); short, in Sam. 

„ „ i ,, neat, Italia; „ knit. 

„ . „ u „ fool, usarono (It.);, „ full.* 

The sound of g we have in bird. 

„ o „ work. 

Long vowels naturally terminate in their correspon- 
ding liquids. This is heard most distinctly in pronouncing 
the long i, where the liquid element of the y is almost 
unavoidable at the end. Arab grammarians therefore consider 
that a long a consists of the short a -j- the pectoral semi- 
vowel (I); the i of the short i -\- the palatal liquid (^); 
the 11 of the short u -\~ the labial liquid (•). See Wal- 
lin, p. 2, 24.). 



Diphthongs. 

From the organic local succession of the three simple 
vowels a, i, u, it follows that real compound vowels can 
only be formed with A, as the first and most independent 
vowel, for their basis. The a, on its onward passage 
from the throat to the aperture of the mouth, may be 
followed or modified by i or u. It may embrace the 
palatal and labial vowels, and carry them along with it 
without having to retrace its steps, or occasioning any 
stoppage, which of course would at once change the 
vowel into a semi -vowel. In Sanskrit, therefore, the 
palatal and labial vowels , if brought in immediate contact 
with a following a, relapse naturally into their correspon- 

* The examples are mostly taken from Ellis, who distinguishes 
between the short a in messa and the stopped a in Sam; a distinc- 
tion which, though essential in a theoretical analysis, does not re- 
quire to be expressed in alphabetical notation. 



XLVII 



ding liquids, y and w, and never form the base of 
diphthongs. The vowels i + a, or u + a, if pronounced 
in quick succession, become ya and \va, but they will 
never coalesce into one vocal sound, because the intona- 
tion of the a lies behind that of i and u; the vocal flatus 
has to be inverted, and this inversion amounts in fact to 
a consonantal stoppage sufficient to change the vowels i 
and u into the breathed liquids y and w. 

The four Bases of Diphthongs. 

According to our definition of diphthongs, their basis 
can only be guttural; but as the guttural a may be short 
or long, and as the two unmodified vowels (e, 6) lie 
even behind the guttural point of contact, we get really 
a four-fold basis for diphthong sounds. Each of the four 
vowels (a, a, e, 6) being liable to a palatal or labial 
modification, we may on physiological grounds expect 
eight different compound vowels. 

This will best be represented by a diagram: 

Guttural. 



Palatal j^/ 



T- 



,vik 



iar 



a 

a6(rFe 



.^Labial. 



oi ei ai ai (e) 

i I I 1 

voice, height, aisle, sailor. 



(o) au an eu ou 

I I I I 

home, found. Europa. bought. 



XLVIII 



Diphthongs with a as base. 

If the short a is quickly followed by i and u, so that, 
as the Hindus say, the guttural is mixed with the palatal 
and labial vowels like milk and water, we get the 
diphthongs ai and au, pronounced as in French. They cor- 
respond in sound to the Italian e and o, and to the 
English sounds in sailor and home. 

Diphthongs with a as Base. 

If the a, as the first element, retains more of its in- 
dependent nature, or is long, then a + i pronounced to- 
gether give the German diphthong ai, as in aisle and 
buy; a -f- u give the German diphthong au, as in found. 

Diphthongs with e as Base. 

If, instead of the short or long a, the base of the 
diphthong becomes e, we get the combinations ei and 
eu, both of rare occurrence except in German, where the 
sound of ei (English height), is thinner than that of ai 
(English ire). In eu, the two vowels are still heard very 
distinctly in the Italian Eur op a. In German they co- 
alesce more, and almost take the sound of oy in boy. 

Diphthongs with 6 as Base. 

In the diphthong oi also, the pronunciation may vary 
according to the degree of speed with which the i follows 
the 0. In 6 + u, on the contrary, the two vowels co- 
alesce easily, and form the well-known deep sound of 
ou in bought, or of a in fall. 

Different Kinds of Diphthongs. 

Although the sounds of the Italian e and o are here 
classed together, as diphthongs, with the English sounds 
of i and ou in ire and stout, this is not meant to deny a dif- 



XLIX 



ference in degree between the two. The former might be 
called monophthongs, because the ear receives but one impres- 
sion, as when two notes are struck simultaneously. It 
is only by theoretical analysis that we can detect the two 
component parts of e and o — a fact well known to 
every Sanskrit scholar. The ai and au, on the contrary, 
are real diphthongs; and an attentive ear will perceive 
ah + ee in the English "I," ah -|- oo in the English 
"out." Sir John Herschel compares these sounds to quick 
arpeggios, where two chords are struck almost, but not 
quite, simultaneously. 

In African dialects, as, for instance, in Zulu, some 
Missionaries say that two vowels combine for the form- 
ation of one sound, as in hai (no), Umcopai (a pro- 
per name); others, that there are no diphthongs, but that, 
whenever two vowels meet, the separate power of each 
is distinctly marked and preserved in pronunciation.'' This 
may depend on a peculiar disposition in the organ of 
hearing as well as in the organ of speech. 

Objections are likely to be raised against treating the 
vowel in "bought" and "fall" as a diphthong. There is, 
however, a diphthong sound which stands to au (proud) 
in the same relation as oi (voice) to ai (vice). I ima- 
gine I hear it in the English broad, which has the same 
vowel as all, bawl, Paul, nor, war; and we certainly 
have it in the Swedish a. The sound of the English 

"to call" is almost identical with the Arabic qaul ( {"O, 

and here the derivation of the sound ou (as in bought or 
call), from an original diphthong cannot be doubted.** 
Perhaps the same sound was intended by the Old German 
ou in boum. The labial element, no doubt, is very 
slight; still, let anybody pronounce a and ou (far and 
bought), and a looking-glass will tell him that he adds 
a distinct labial pressure in order to change the a into ou. 

* An Essay on the Phonology and Orthography of the Zulu and 
kindred Dialects in Southern Africa, by L. Grout, p. 441. 

** See Wallin, On pronunciation of Arabic, in the Journal of 
the German Oriental Society, IX, p. 41. 

d 



Voivels broken by e or i. 

In some languages we find that certain vowels are 
modified by an inherent e, or, as some say, by i. The 
vowels most liable to this modification are a, o, u. 

The a, with an inherent e, becomes German a, as in 
vater, very nearly the same sound as in the English 
substantive bear. O, by the same influence, takes the 
German sound of 6 in Konig, or that of the French 
eu in peu. U, in German, becomes ii, the French u 
in jurer. 

To many organs these sounds are so troublesome 
that they are sometimes avoided altogether, as in English. 
Their pronunciation varies in different dialects; and the 
German a sounds in some places like e, the ii like u. 

If we remember how the simple vowel sounds were 
represented by Kempelen in a mathematical progression 
according to the amount of aperture of the throat and 
lips required for their formation, we shall see that what 
takes place, if an a is changed to ae, an o to oe, and 
an u to ue, is in each case a diminution of the guttural 
aperture. While the pure a is formed by 5 degrees of 
labial and 3 degrees of guttural aperture , the ae is pro- 
duced by 5 degrees of labial, but only 1 degree of gut- 
tural aperture. Thus, in the pronunciation of oe, the 
labial aperture remains at 2 degrees, and in the pronun- 
ciation of ue at 1 degree; but in either case the guttural 
aperture is respectively reduced from 4 degrees and 5 
degrees to i degree. We may, therefore, represent the 
broken vowels (Grimm's Umlaut) in the following 
manner : • — 

ae = V. i ; oe = II. 1 ; ue = I. 1 . 

There is one class of languages, the Tataric, where 
these broken sounds are of frequent occurrence, and of 
great importance. The "harmony of vowels " which per- 
vades these dialects would be lost altogether (as it is, to 
a great extent , if Tataric languages are written with Arabic 
letters), unless to these broken vowels a distinct category 



LI 



were assigned. Besides the broken or softened a, o, 
and u, the Tataric languages have a fourth vowel, a 
softening of the i, which is said to be like the sound of 
i in will. Thus we have, in Yakut: 

Hard vowels a, o, i, u. Heavy vowels a, a, o, 6, 
Soft vowels a, 6, i, ii. Light vowels i, i, u, ii. 

All the vowels in a Yakut word depend on the first. 
If the first is hard, all following vowels must be hard; 
if soft, all become soft. Again, if the vowel of one 
syllable is heavy, that of the next can only be the same 
heavy vowel, or its corresponding light vowel. If it is 
light, that of the next syllable must be the same light 
vowel, or its corresponding heavy vowel. For instance, 
if the first syllable of a word has a, the next can only 
have a or i; if a, a or i; if o, o ur u; if o, o or ii. 

The vowels would , therefore , come under the 
following physiological categories: — 



Guttural 



a, short, as in Sa7n] long, as m psalm; 







> : 


11 


work 
bird 


11 


cur (?) 


Palatal 




i „ 


11 


knit; 


11 


neat. 


Labial 




u „ 


11 


full; 


11 


fool. 


Gutturo- 


palatal 


ai (e) „ 


11 


debt; 


11 


date. 


•)•> 


;•) 


ai „ 


11 




11 


aisle. 


51 


,•>•> 


ei „ 


11 




11 


height. 


">•> 


•)•> 


oi „ 


11 




11 


voice. 


Gutturo-labial 


au (o) „ 


11 


not; 


11 


note. 


•)■) 


•)■> 


GU „ 


11 




11 


proud. 


•)•) 


n 


eu „ 


11 




Ita 


LEuropa. 


"ti 


?7 


ou „ 


11 






bought. 


Lingual 




re „ 


11 


fiery; 


11 


reach. 


Dental 




le 


11 


friendly , 


11 


leach. 


A broken, as in Vater. 




I broken. 


as in 


Diener. 


„ 




Kdnig. 




u „ , 




Gate. 



It has frequently been remarked that the short vowels 
in English (sam, debt, knit, not, full) differ from their 
corresponding long vowels, not merely in quantity, but 

d* 



LII 



ill quality also. As they mostly occur in unaccented 
syllables, they have lost that vocal "timbre" which the 
short vowels in German and Italian have preserved. Yet 
it is not necessary to invent new signs for these surd 
vowels, because in origin they correspond exactly to the 
short vowels in other languages, only that they are uni- 
formly modified by a peculiarity of pronunciation inherent 
in the English tongue. It is not by the eye, but by the 
ear only, that foreigners can learn this peculiar pronun- 
ciation of the short vowels in Enelish. 



II. 

How can these principal Sounds, after proper Classifica- 
tion, be expressed by us in ivriting and printing^ 
ivithout obscuring their physiological Valiie^ and ivi- 
thout creating new typographical Difficulties? 

The results at which we have arrived in the first part 
of our inquiry are those on which, Avith very slight and 
unimportant exceptions, all may be said to agree, who, 
whether in India or Europe, have attempted to analyse 
scientifically the elements of human speech. There are, 
no doubt, some refinements, and some more accurate 
subdivisions , as will be seen in the extracts from 
the Pratisak/iyas , which it will be necessary to attend to 
in exceptional cases, and particularly in philological re- 
searches. Bat, as far as the general physiological outlines 
of our phonetic system are concerned , we hardly expect 
any serious difference of opinion. 

Widely different opinions, however, start up as soon 
as we approach the second and apparently less impor- 
tant question, how these sounds are to be expressed in 
writing. Omitting the different propositions to adopt an 
Oriental alphabet, such as Sanskrit or Arabic, or the 
Greek alphabet, or newly invented letters, whether short- 
hand or otherwise, we shall take it for granted that the 



LIII 



Latin alphabet, which, though of Semitic origin, has so 
long been the armour of thought in the struggles and 
conquests of civilisation , has really the greatest and most 
natural claims on our consideration. 

There are two principles regulating the application of 
the Latin alphabet to our physiological sounds on which 
there has been a general agreement since the days of 
Halhed and Wilkins: 

1 . That the sound of every physiological category shall 
have but one representative letter , and that therefore each 
letter shall always express the same sound. 

2. That simple sounds shall be expressed by simple 
letters, and compound sounds by compound letters. 

If with these two princijoles we try to write the forty- 
four consonants of our physiological alphabet by means 
of the twenty-four consonants of the Latin, it follows 
that we must raise their number by the addition of dia- 
critical signs , in order to make them answer our 
purpose. 

Now in the invention of new diacritical signs, two 
ways seem at first to be open. Every nation might ex- 
press the sounds for which the Latin alphabet does not 
supply a simple letter, in the same manner in which these 
sounds are expressed in its own language, only that by 
this method the two principles of expressing the same 
sound by the same letter, and simple sounds by simple 
letters would at once be placed in jeopardy. The Latin 
has no letter for the diphthong ai in aisle. An English 
Missionary, hearing the sound of ai in the dialect of an 
African tribe, might therefore feel inclined, if he took it as 
a diphthong, to write it either ai, as in aisle, or ei as in 
height, or uy as in buy; or if he took it for a simple 
vowel, i as in ire. The confusion arising from this would 
be endless , for though in English we know what sound 
is meant by ai, ei, uy, and i, in certain words like 
aisle, height, buy, and ire, it would be impossible 
to guess what sounds they were meant to stand for in 
a foreign dialect. But suppose that English Missionaries 



tiv 



fixed upon the i to express the sound of i in ire: the 
consequence would be that no Missionary belonging to 
any other country would be able to avail himself of their 
translations of the Bible , because no German, no French- 
man, no Italian , no Spaniard , would admit that i was the 
fittest sign to express the diphthong ai, as heard in ire. 
Again, an English Missionary might naturally write the 
palatal tenuis, as heard in church, by ch; but a French 
Missionary would write tch , a German tsch, an Italian 
cia. Uniformity, therefore, would be impossible, and a 
translation of the Bible for instance, into the Galla lan- 
guage, published in England, would have to be rewritten 
before a Missionary of any other country could avail 
himself of it. The practical inconveniences of such a 
system, if system it can be called, are so great and so 
glaring, that it would hardly find an advocate at present, 
though it has been, and is still, adopted to a great ex- 
tent in geographical and historical works. 

In order to avoid this uncertainty which must arise 
if every nation adopted its own system of spelling in 
writing foreign languages, it has been proposed by an 
opposite party, that no characters which have a different 
value in the principal European alphabets, should be ad- 
mitted into a general alphabet. This extreme view, 
however, would deprive us of half of the alphabet, and 
like most general principles, it requires considerable qua- 
lification, before it can be made available for practical 
purposes. 

If then we exclude all national and exclusive systems 
of spelling, and retain as much as possible the three 
general principles, of expressing 

a simple sound by a simple letter, 
a compound sound by a compound letter, 
and the same sound by the same letter, — 
if besides we bear in mind that none but Latin let- 
ters are to be admitted into the Universal al- 
phabet, it will be seen that there remain only two ways 
in which our problem can be solved. 

We must first of all find out certain physiological analogies 



LV 



which exist between those sounds for which the Latin alpha- 
bet supplies simple letters, and others for which it does not. 
Thus we should find that there is analogy between the 
Linguals and the Dentals, between the Palatals and the 
Gutturals, between different nasals, such as n, ng, ny, 
and between different sibilants, such as s in please and 
pleasure. If then we retained t and d, as we naturally 
should, for the usual dental sounds, expressed by these 
letters in Latin, we might use the same, Avith some dia- 
critical marks, to express the lingual sound of t and d, 
wherever it occurs in a foreign tongue. Again, as we 
know that the palatal sound of ch and j , arises most 
frequently from an original guttural, we should naturally 
use k and g, with 'a diacritical mark, to express these 
modified sounds which in English are usually expressed 
by ch and j , in Italian by ci and gi , in German by tsch 
and dsch. In the same manner we should retain the 
general base of n, where we had to express the guttural 
n as in-eur, the palatal n as in inch, or the lingual 
n as in some Indian dialects. 

After the analogies of certain classes of letters have been 
established, — and this has in fact been done by the physiolo- 
gical explanation of the alphabet, given in the first part — the 
only dilemma which has still to be solved is this : Shall we in- 
vent a peculiar diacritical mark for every modification? Shall 
we have one mark to express palatality, another to express 
linguality, a third to express cerebrality and so on — or 
shall we be content with indicating by one uniform pro- 
cess the fact of any letter being modified? The former 
plan would be more perfect in theory, but practically 
hopeless; the latter is practically more convenient, but 
not exempt from theoretical objections. 

If every letter, which is used as a base was liable to 
but one modification, two sets of letters, say simple, and 
dotted, would be sufficient for our purpose. The simple 
letters would express the original, the dotted the modified 
sound of a letter, and our new alphabet would be per- 
fect and unobjectionable. A guttural k can only become 
a palatal a dental t can only become a lingual. Hence 



LVI 



if we fixed upon a dot as the general sign of modifica- 
tion, k and t, would be perfectly intelligible, and perhaps 
more than if we took the dot as the peculiar ex- 
ponent of linguality, and a line as the peculiar ex- 
ponent of palatality, writing k and t, instead of k 
and t. 

It ought to be stated, however, that there are a few 
letters, h, n, and 1, which are liable to more than one 
modification, and where therefore, more than one sign 
of modification would be required. Here the most natural 
plan seems to be that adopted by Professor Wilson. 
He marks the first modification of any letter by one dot, 
the second by two, the third by three. Thus he expresses 
the dental n by n; the lingual n by n , the Tamil n 
by n; the guttural n by n, and the palatal n by n- 
This is by far the most systematic plan that has as yet 
been proposed, because it is far easier to remember the diffe- 
rent degrees of modification, the first, thesecond, the third &c., 
according to the number of dots, than to recall the hidden 
powers of accents, lines, hooks, crooks, and half-moons &c., 
which have no meaning in themselves, and which different 
people would adopt for different purposes. If Professor 
Wilson had carried out his plan consistently, his system 
might have become the standard of a universal alphabet. 
He deviates, however, in some most essential points from 
his own principles. He writes the simple palatal tenuis 
by a compound letter ch , instead of A', the corresponding 
media by j, instead of (/, and he thus places himself in 
opposition with his own theory by giving up the prin- 
ciple of analogy and adopting the common system of 
English spelling against which no one has brought for- 
ward more powerful arguments than he himself. This 
has rendered his system of transcription more convenient 
perhaps for English readers, but has deprived it of that 
character of universality which it might otherwise have 
claimed. 

What, however, is most essential to determine in every 
system is not so much how certain modifications of aLatin base 
should be expressed typographically, but rather that there 



LVII 



should be a uniform arrangement of these modifications. If all 
scholars could be brought to agree on what is to be treated 
as the first, the second, or the third modification of a 
base-letter, it would be of less consequence which sign was 
fixed upon to indicate the first, the second, or third de- 
gree of modification. Professor Wilson's points would 
answer, and so would mathematical types n, n^ , n.2, ng, 
as pointed out by Professor Newman;* so would Latin 
letters mixed with Greek types, to express modifications 
of the first, and with Russian types, to express modifi- 
cations of the second degree. 

Supposing our letters have been arranged in such a 
manner that those which can be expressed by Latin types 
form the first class; we should then have a second class 
consisting of modified letters which can be traced back 
physiologically to one of the letters of the first class, 



* Mathematical types would be particularly useful for translite- 
rating Inscriptions containing letters the power of which is not yet 
sufficiently determined to enable us to refer each sign to its proper 
physiological category, or where the same sound is expressed by 
different signs as in the Babylonian and Egyptian Inscriptions. The 
following remarks are taken from a letter of Professor Newman, to 
whom I am indebted for several useful remarks on the problem of 
transcribing and transliterating Oriental languages: "But beside 
these, he writes, we have the mathematical types. The objection to 

I n in 

letters with double or triple accent, as c, c, c ... is that it wastes 
room and looks ugly in printing; but this does not equally apply to 
k, k2 , kg , k^ . . . It seems to me that such types would be of great 
value as applied to the Cuneiform inscriptions , and I beg leave to 
call your attention to this. Colonel Rawlinson, some years back, 
told me that he had ascertained that certain letters in the Scythian 
inscriptions of Behistun were of the T class, but he did not know 
whether they were T, D, Th, Dh, etc. I tried to convince him 
that he would do a vast service to the knowledge of the language 
by printing transcriptions into a Exiropean type, by aid of ar- 
bitrary conventions. Let T, Tg , T3 , Tj , T^ , Tj, , Tg represent 
six characters , each of which he has good reason to believe to be 
some kind of dental , and so of all other characters. Thus we might 
have a line such as the following, 

Ko A Tg L2 I2 R- K3 Oo which by means of the 

key would at pleasure be reconvcrtible into the original. 



LVIll 



and which therefore would have to be expressed by mo- 
dified types of the first degree. A few letters only would 
then remain requiring to be represented by modified types 
of the second degree. 

Now if the first class was represented by simple types, 
the second might consist of types with one , the 
third of types with two dots. There is, however, a 
grave objection against this and any other plan which 
requires types , not supplied by a common English 
fount. It is useless for a Missionary who in a re- 
mote station has to print translations, or tracts and 
prayers, and has nothing but a small fount at his dispo- 
sal. For hira it is necessary that an alphabet should be 
devised, capable of expressing all the categories of the 
physiological scale of letters, and yet not requiring one 
single new or artificial type. This can be done in the 
following way: 

Let the first class of letters be printed in 
Roman characters; 

the second, comprising the modified letters 
of the first degree, in Italics; 

the third, comprising the modified letters 
of the second degree, in Small Capitals. We shall 
now examine each class in particular. 

Guttural^ Dental, and Labial Tenuis. 

The guttural, dental, and labial tenues are naturally 
expressed by k, t, p. 

Guttural^ Dental, and Labial Media. 

The modification which changes these tenues into 
mediae should consistently be expressed by a uniform 
diacritical sign attached to k , t , p. For more than one 
reason, however, we prefer the Latin letters, g, d, b. 

It is understood that g, after once being chosen as 
the representative of the guttural media, like g in gun, 
whatever vowel may follow, can never be used pro- 
miscuously both for the guttural and the palatal media, 
as the English g in gun and gin. 



LIX 



How to express Aspirated Letters? 

The aspirated tenues and medise in the guttural, den- 
tal, and labial series which, according to the description 
given above, are not compound, but simple though mo- 
dified sounds, should be written by simple consonants 
with a diacritical mark of aspiration. This would give us : 
, t , p , g , d , b . 

These types have been cut many times since Count 
Volney founded his prize at the French Academy for 
transcribing Oriental alphabets, and even before his time. 
They exist at Berlin, Paris, Leipzig, Darmstadt, Peters- 
burg , and several other places. They have been cut in 
different sizes and on different bodies. Still the difficulty 
of having them at hand when required, making them 
range properly, and keeping always a sufficient stock, 
has been so great even in places like London, Paris, 
and Berlin, that their adoption would defeat the very 
object of our alphabet, which is to be used in Green- 
land as well as in Borneo, and is to be handled by inex- 
perienced printers even in the most distant stations, where 
nothing but an ordinary English fount can be expected 
to exist. In our Missionary alphabet we must therefore 
have no dots, no hooks, no accents, no Greek letters, 
no new types, no diacritical appendages whatsoever. No 
doubt. Missionary Societies might have all these letters 
cut and cast on as many sizes and bodies as necessary. 
Punches or founts might be sent to the principal Missio- 
nary stations. But how long would this last? If a few 
psalms or catechisms had to be printed at Bangkok, and 
if there were no hooked letters to represent the aspirated 
palatal sound by a single type (k"), is it likely that they 
would send to Calcutta or London for this type, which, 
after it arrived, might perhaps be found not to range 
with the rest? It is much more likely that, in the ab- 
sence of the type prescribed by the Missionary Societies 
at home, each missionary would find himself thrown on 
his own resources, and different alphabets would again 



LX 



spring up in different places. Besides, our alphabet is 
not only to be an alphabet of missionaries. In time it 
is to become the alphabet of the tribes and nations 
whose first acquaintance with writing will be through the 
Bible translated into their language and transcribed in a 
rational alphabet. Fifty or a hundred years hence, it 
may be the alphabet of civilised nations in Africa, Austra- 
lia, and the greater part of Asia. Must all the printers 
of Australian advertisements, the editors of African news- 
papers, the publishers of Malay novels or Papua pri- 
mers, write to Mr. Watts, Crown Court, Temple Bar, 
for new sorts of dotted and hooked letters? I do not 
say it is impossible; but many things are possible, and 
still not practical; and this is exactly what I fear with 
regard to these new hooked and dotted types. Surely, 
if the problem of a uniform Missionary Alphabet could 
have been solved by the trifling outlay of a few new 
punches, it would have been solved long ago. 

In questions of this kind, no harm is done if prin- 
ciples are sacrificed to expediency; and I therefore pro- 
pose to write the aspirate letters, as all English and 
most French and German scholars have written them 
hitherto, by 

kh, th, ph, gh, dh, dh. 

What do we lose by this? The spiritus asper () is 
after all but a faintly disguised H, changed into I and I, 
for asper and lenis, and then abbreviated into '' and'.* 
Besides, the languages where these simple aspirates occur 
are not many; and in India, where they are of most 
frequent use, the phonetic system is so carefully arranged 
that no ambiguity can arise whether kh be meant for an 
aspirated guttural tenuis or for k followed by the semi- 
vowel h. If the liquid h comes in immediate contact with k, 
k 4- ^ is always changed into g -)~ gh, or a stop (virama) 
has to be put after the k. This might be done where, 
as in discussing grammatical niceties, it is desirable to 
distinguish between kh and k-h. The missionary, except 

* A different but fanciful explanation of these signs is given by 
Wallin, p. 63. 



LXI 



in India, will hardly ever suffer from this ambiguity; 
and if the scholar should insist on its being removed, we 
shall see immediately how even the most delicate scruples 
on this point could be satisfied. 

There is still, if we examine the alphabets hitherto 
proposed or adopted, a w^hole array of dots and hooks, 
which must be eliminated, or at least be reduced, as far 
as possible; and though we might, after gaining our point 
with regard to the h, get through gutturals, dentals, and 
labials, we still have new and more formidable enemies 
to encounter in the palatals and linguals. 

How to express Palatals? 

Palatals are modifications of gutturals, and therefore 
the most natural course would be to express them by 
the guttural series, adding only a line or an accent or a 
dot, or any other uniform diacritical sign to indicate 
their modified value. So great, however, has been the 
disinclination to use diacritical signs, that in common 
usage , where the palatal tenuis had to be expressed, the 
most anomalous expedients have been resorted to in order 
to avoid hooks or dots. In English, to represent the 
Sanskrit palatal tenuis, ch has been used; and as the h 
seemed to be too much in the teeth of all analogy, the 
simple c even has been adopted , leaving ch for the aspi- 
rated palatal. On the same ground , the Germans write 
tsch for the palatal tenuis, and tschh for the aspirate. 
The French write tch and tchh. The Italians do not he- 
sitate to use ci for the tenuis, though I do not see how 
they could express the corresponding aspirate. The Rus- 
sians recommend their H; and the Brahmans would pro- 
bably recommend a Sanskrit type. Still all, even the 
German tsch, are meant to represent simple consonants, 
which, with the exception of the tenuis aspirata in Sanskrit, 
would not make a preceding short vowel long. That in 
English the ch, in Italian ci, and in German tsch, have 
a sound very like the palatal tenuis , is of course a mere 
accident. In English the ch is not always sounded alike; 



IXII 



and its pronunciation in the different dialects of Europe 
varies more than that of most letters. Besides, our al- 
phabetic representative of the palatal sound is to be pro- 
nounced and comprehended , not by a few people in Ger- 
many or Italy, but by all the nations of Africa and 
Australia. Now to them the ch would prove deceptive; 
first, because we never use the simple c (by this we make 
up for the primary alphabetical divorce introduced by the 
libertus of Spurius Carvilius Ruga), and, secondly, be- 
cause the h would seem to indicate the modification of 
the aspirate. 

The natural way of Avriting the palatals, so as not 
to obscure their close relationship to the gutturals, would 
be, k, kh, g, gh. 

But here the same difficulty arises as before. If the 
dots or marks are printed separately, the lines where 
these dots occur become more distant than the rest. For 
one such dotted letter the compositor has to compose a 
whole line of blanks. These will shift, particularly when 
there are corrections, and the misprints are endless. In 
Tumour's edition of the Mahavansa, which is printed 
with dotted letters, we get thirty -five pages quarto of 
errata to about a hundred pages of text. But they might 
be cast on one body. True, they might be — perhaps 
they will be. At all events they have been; and Volney 
offered such types to anybody that would ask for them. 
Still, when I inquire at a press like the University press 
of Oxford, they are not forthcoming. We must not ex- 
pect that what is impossible in the nineteenth century 
at Oxford, wiU be possible in the twentieth century at 
Timbuktu. 

Now the difficulty, so far as I can see, was solved 
by a compositor to whom I sent some manuscript, where 
each palatal letter was marked by a line under it. The 
compositor, not knowing what these lines meant, took 
them for the usual marks of italics , and I was surprised 
to see that this answered the purpose, saved much trouble 
and much expense, and, on the whole, did not look 
badly. As every English fount includes italic letters, the 



LXITI 



usefulness of these modified types for our Missionary 
alphabet "springs to the eyes," as we say in German. 
They are sufficiently startling to remind the reader of 
their modified pronunciation, and at the same time they 
indicate, as in most cases they ought, their original gut- 
tural character to the reflecting philologist. As in an or- 
dinary book italics are used to attract attention, so also 
in our alphabet. Even to those who have never heard 
the names of guttural and palatal letters, they will show 
that the k is not the usual k. Persons in the slightest 
degree acquainted with phonetics will be made aware that 
the k is , in shape and sound , a modification of the k. 
All who admit that palatals are modifications of gut- 
turals would see that the modification intended by k 
could only be the palatal. And as to the proper pro- 
nunciation of the k, as palatal tenuis, in diiferent dialects, 
people who read their own language expressed in this 
alphabet will never hesitate over its pronunciation. Others 
must learn it, as they now learn the pronunciation of 
Italian ci and chi, or rest satisfied to know that k stands 
for the palatal tenuis, and for nothing else. Sooner or 
later this expedient is certain to be adopted. Thus we 
get, as the representatives of the palatals, 
k, kh, g, gh. 

Now, also, it will appear how we can avoid the am- 
biguity before alluded to, whether the h of aspirated 
consonants expresses their aspirated nature or an inde- 
pendent guttural semi -vowel or flatus. Let the h, where 
it is not meant as a letter, but as a diacritical sign, be 
printed as an italic h, and the last ground for complaint 
will vanish. Still this is only needful for philologi- 
cal objects; for practical purposes the common h may 
remain. . 

In ivritiiig, the dots or lines under the palatals will 
have to be retained. This has been considered as a grievous 
inconsistency, because, it is said, people could never be 
taught that an italic letter in printing corresponded to a 
dotted letter in writing. I do not take so low a view 
of the human intellect, and I find that wherever the art 



LXIV 



of printing has been introduced, the current handwriting 
has always diverged, and sometimes very considerably, 
from the form of printed types. Hence I do not despair 
that a well educated Missionary will succeed in making his 
converts understand that, unless they can imitate italics 
in writing, they may indicate these modified letters by a 
uniform sign of modification, a line or a dot. At all 
events the natives will find less difficulty in learning this, 
than in piling up a quantity of mysterious signs at the 
top of every modified letter. Even the mere dots un- 
der these letters take too much time to allow us to 
suppose that the Africans will retain them for any length 
of time when they come to write for themselves. 
They will find some more current marks, as, for instance, 
by drawing the last stroke of the letter below the line. 
In writing, however, anybody may please himself, so long- 
as the printer knows what is intended w^hen he has to 
bring it before the public. As a hint to German mission- 
aries, I beg to say that, for writing quickly in this new 
alphabet, they will find it useful in manuscript notes to 
employ German letters instead of italics. 

An accidental, though by no means undesirable, ad- 
vantage is gained by using italics to express the palatals. 
If we read that Sanskrit vach (or vatch, or vatsch) 
is the same as Latin vox, but that sometimes vach in 
Sanskrit is vak or vac, the eye imagines that it has 
three different words to deal with. By means of italics, 
vak and va/c are almost identical to the sight, as kirk 
and Jiurk (church), would be if English were ever to be 
transcribed into the missionary alphabet. The same applies 
to the verb, where the phonetic distinction between va/cmi, 
vakshi, vakti, can thus be expressed without in any 
way disguising the etymological identity of the root. It 
would be wrong if we allowed the physiological prin- 
ciples of our alphabet to be modified for the sake of 
Comparative Philology; but where the phonetic changes 
of physiological sounds and the historical changes of words 
happen to run parallel, an alphabet, if well arranged, 
should be capable of giving this fact clear expression. 



LXV 



If the pronunciation of the palatals is deteriorated, 
they sometimes take the sound oftch, ts, s, sh, or even 
th. Coelum (xolXov) becomes Italian cielo; where the 
initial sound is the same as in church (kirk). In old 
Friesic we have tzaka instead of English check. In 
French, ciel is pronounced with an initial sharp dental s; 
chose, with an initial sharp palatal s. In Spanish, the 
pronunciation of c before e and i is that of the Eng- 
lish th. In these cases when we have to deal with 
unwritten languages, the sounds, whether simple or double, 
should be traced to their proper phonetic category, and 
be written accordingly. It will be well, however, to 
bear in mind that pronunciation may change with time 
and vary in different places , and that the most gene- 
ral representation of these sounds by palatals or ita- 
licized • gutturals will generally prove the best in the 
long run. 

It must be clear that, with the principles followed 
hitherto , it would be impossible to make an exception 
in favour of the English j as representative of the palatal 
media. It would be a schism in the whole system, and 
would besides deprive us of those advantages which Com- 
parative Philology derives from a consistent representation 
of modified sounds. That Sanskrit yug a (^uyov) is derived 
from yu^, to join, would be intelligible to everybody; 
while neither the German, to whom j is y, nor the 
Frenchman nor the Spaniard would see the connexion 
between j and g. 

How to express Linguals? 

The linguals, as modifications of the dentals, have 
been hitherto written by common consent as dentals with 
dots or lines. In writing, this method must be retained, 
though no doubt a more current form will soon grow 
up if the alphabet is used by natives. They will pro- 
bably draw the last stroke of the t and d belo\\ the line, 
and connect the body of the letter with the perpendicular 
line below. The linguals, therefore, will be, t, th, d, dh; 



LXYI 



only here also the printer will step in and convert the 
clotted or underlined letters into italics, t, th, d, dh, 

I am at a loss how to mark that peculiar pronuncia- 
tion of the dental aspirate, whether tenuis or media, which 
we write in English simply by th. It is not of frequent 
occurrence; still it occurs not only in European, but in 
Oriental languages, — for instance, in Burmese. If it 
occurs in a language where no trace of the pure dental 
aspirate remains, Ave might safely write th (and dh) or 
ill (and d/i), as we do in English. The Anglo-Saxon 
letters t* and ts would be very convenient; but how few 
founts, even in England, possess these forms. Again, ^h 
and zh, and even ^^ and ^' , have been proposed; but 
they are liable to still stronger objections. Where it is 
necessary to distinguish the aspirated th and dh from the 
assibilated, I propose for the latter a dot under the h 
(th and dh). But I think th and dh will, on the whole, 
be found to answer all practical purposes, if we only 
look to people who have to write and read their own 
language. Philologists, whatever we attempt, cannot be 
informed of every nicety and shade in pronunciation by 
the eye. They must learn from grammars or from per- 
sonal intercourse in what manner each tribe pronounces 
its dental aspirate; and Comparative Philology will find 
all its ends answered if th represents the organic dental 
aspirate, until its pronunciation deteriorates so far as to 
make it a mere flatus or a double consonant. In this 
case the Missionary also will have to Avrite it ts^ or ss. 
or whatever sound he may happen to hear. 

Adopting therefore italics to express modifications of 
the first degree, we should have to write the five prin- 
cipal classes of physiological sounds, by the following 
typographic exponents: — 





Tenuis. 


Tenuis asp. 


Media. 


Media asp. 


Guttural 


k 


k/l 


g 


gh 


Palatal 


k 


kh 


9 


gh 


Dental 


t 


th (th) 


d 


dh (dh) 


Lingual 


t 


th 


d 


dh 


Labial 


P 


ph 


b 


hh 



LXVII 



How to express the Nasals? 

In each of these five classes we have now to look 
for an exponent of the nasal. 

Where the nasal is modified by the following conso- 
nant, it requires no modificatory sign, for reasons explained 
in the first part of our essay. The nasal in sink and 
sing is guttural; in inch and injure, palatal; in hint 
and bind, dental; in imp and dumb, labial. 

But where these nasals occur at the beginning of 
words or at the end of syllables, each must have its 
own mark, and we must therefore introduce here for the 
first time our second class of modified letters , the 
Small Capitals. They were suggested to me by Professor 
Newman and they are recommended also by Mr. Ellis. 
They are henceforth to mark all modifications of the 
second degree. Let then the dental nasal be n, the la- 
bial nasal m, the lingual nasal n. Where the guttural 
nasal is really so evanescent as not to bear expression 
by ng, we must write n, instead of n- as originally 
proposed in the Missionary alphabet. What we call the 
palatal n is generally not a simple but a compound 
nasal, and should be written ny. For transliterating, 
however, we want a distinct sign, because the palatal nasal 
exists as a simple type in Sanskrit, and every single type 
must be transliterated by a single letter. Here I should 
propose the Spanish n, because it causes the least diffi- 
culty to the printer. 

The lingual n occurs in Sanskrit only. Its character 
is generally determined by lingual letters either following 
or preceding. Still, where it must be marked in Sanskrit 
transliterations, let it be represented by the italic n. 



How to express the liquid Semi-voivels? 

The Latin letters which naturally offer themselves 
as the counterparts of the semi -vowels, are 'h, y, r, 1, 
and w. 



LXVllI 



The delicate sound of the guttural liquid semi -vowel 
is in reality the same as the guttural flatus lenis, and 
both categories may therefore be represented by one sign. 
In Semitic dialects the y 'hain, has usually been considered 
as the primitive guttural liquid semi -vowel, but the more 
pectoral and less modified !S, has perhaps a better right 
to this place, where, at the beginning of words and syl- 
lables, it is used with the same intention as the Greek 

spiritus lenis. Where the Arabic I, is used for this purpose, 

-^ ^ i> 
it is marked by the Hamzeh, f, f, i. If in these cases, 

we look upon the elif hamzatum as the spiritus lenis, 
we might indeed distinguish this, as spiritus lenis, from 
the Elif, as a liquid semi -vowel, heard at the end of a 
long a, as y and w are heard at the end of a long i and u. 

Thus Wallin says that | , if used as a long initial a, 

consists of the Hamzeh, or spiritus lenis, the vowel-mo- 
tion of the throat, a, and the guttural liquid semi-vowel. 
The long initial i and u, would likewise consist of the 
Hamzeh, the palatal or labial vowel- motions, and the 
palatal and labial liquid semi- vowels, y and w. This 
is intelligible as a theory, but practically it seems imj)os- 
sible to make a distinction between the liquid semi- 
vowels and the spiritus lenis on any point of articulation, 
anterior to the palatal. Here there is for the first time 
a slightly perceptible distinction between the liquid, as 
heard in ja, and the flatus lenis, as heard in taglich, 
and the same applies to the dental and labial classes. 
It is therefore in these classes only that we require diffe- 
rent representative types for the liquid and the flatus 
lenis, while in the guttural series, and in three series 
which precede it in the Semitic alphabet, the same 
type may be used to express liquid and flatus lenis; 
sounds, differing in definition, but identical in pronun- 
ciation. 

The palatal liquid is transcribed in Germany by j, 
w^hich, as far as archaeological arguments go, would cer- 
tainly be the most appropriate sign to represent the semi- 



LXIX 



vowel corresponding to the palatal vowel i. A^, however, 
the j is one of the most variously pronounced letters in 
Europe, and as in England it has been usual to employ 
it as a palatal media, it is better to discard it altogether 
from our alphabet, and to write y. 

The lingual liquid is r; if in some dialects the r is 
pronounced very near to the throat, this might be 
marked by an italic r, or rh. 

The dental liquid is written 1. The mouille sound of 
1 may be expressed by an italic /. 

Where the labial liquid is formed by the lips, let it 
be written w. More usually it is formed by the lower 
lip and the edge of the upper teeth. It then be- 
comes what the Hindus call a labio- dental semi- vowel, 
but is hardly to be distinguished from the labial 
flatus lenis. 

How to express the Flatus (Sibilants)? 

As the unmodified flatus, or, as it should more pro- 
perly be called, the spiritus asper and lenis, can only 
occur before a vowel, the printer would find no difficulty 
in representing these two sounds bv the usual signs '^ and ' 
placed before or over the vowel. At the beginning of 
words there could be no reasonable objection to this 
mode of representing the very slight and hardly conso- 
nantal sound of the spiritus asper and lenis. But it is 
objectionable in the middle of words. In such cases the 
Greeks did not mark it. They wrote ap[J.a, chariot, but 
£^ap[JLaTO(; , with beautiful chariots; they wrote avrp, man; 
but suav8pLa, manliness. As to the spiritus asper, which 
we have in vehement, vehicle, I fear that ve'^ement, 
ve'^icle, will be objected to by the printer, and it will 
therefore be preferable to express the spiritus asper in 
every case by an h. 

The guttural flatus asper, as heard in loch, must then 
be expressed by 'h. The flatus lenis cannot be distin- 
guished in pronunciation from the guttural liquid, and 



LXX 



there can be no objection to marking both by the same 
sign, 'h. 

The Semitic dialects which are very fond of guttural 
sounds, have divided the guttural flatus into two as for in- 
stance in Arabic , where we have — (asper), c (lenis), 
and ^ (asper), d (lenis). The most accurate description 
of these sounds is given by Wallin, and it is evident 
that the difference between — - and j^ c and c, arises 
from the higher or lower position of the point of con- 
tact by which these consonants are produced in a Se- 
mitic throat. In transcribing Arabic we can distinguish 
the ^ and c by Italics, Vi and '/?, from their correspon- 
ding letters ~ and £, "^h and 'h. At all events '^h and'h 
must remain as basis modified by a uniform diacritical 
mark. 

The dental flatus sibilans, pronounced sharp as in 
sin or grass, has, of course, the best claims on the 
letter s as its representative. Its corresponding soft sound, 
as heard in please or zeal, is best expressed by z; 
only Ave must take care not to pronounce it like the 
German z. The more consistent way of expressing the 
sonant flatus would be to put a spiritus lenis over the s. 
This, however, would hardly be tolerated, and would 
be against the Third Resolution of our alphabetical con- 
ferences, where it was agreed that only after the Roman 
types, and the modifications of Roman types as supplied 
by common founts (capitals, italics &c.), had been exhaust- 
ed, diacritical signs should be admitted into the standard 
alphabet. 

As all palatals are represented by italics, the palatal 
sibilant will naturally be Avritten with an italic s. This 
would represent the sharp sound as heard in sharp or 
chose. The soft palatal sibilant will have the same 
exponent as the soft dental sibilant, only changed into 
italics (s). This would be the proper sign for the French 
sound in je, genou, and for the African soft palatal 
sibilant, which, as Dr. Krapf, Dr. Tutschek, and Mr. 



LXXI 



Boyce remark, will never be properly pronounced by an 
adult European. 

Where it is necessary to express the original, not yet 
assibilated, palatal flatus, which is heard in konig and 
kon'ge, an Italic y, with the spiritus asper and lenis, 
w^ould answer the purpose (^y and 'y). 

The labial flatus should be written by f. This is the 
sharp flatus, as heard in life and find. The soft labial 
flatus ought consistently to be written as f with a spiritus 
lenis. But here again I fear w^e must sacrifice consistency 
to expediency, and adopt that sign with which we are 
familiar, the Latin v. As we express the labial semi- 
vowel by w, the v is still at our disposal, and will pro- 
bably be preferred to 'f by the unanimous votes of mis- 
sionaries and printers. 

The lingual flatus is a sound peculiar to Sanskrit, 
and , owing to its hollow guttural pronunciation , it may 
be expressed there, as it has been hitherto, by s followed 
by the guttnral h (sh). The Sanskrit knows of no 
soft sibilants; hence we require but one representative 
for the lingual sh. 

Rask in his essay "De pleno systemate sibilantium in 
Unguis montanis , item De methodo Ibericam et Armenicam 
linguam Uteris Europaeis exprimendi," Havnise 1832, ad- 
mits ten distinct sibilants. The old Scandinavian language 
and Danish, he says, have but one sibilant, the hard s; 
so has Latin, because the z is a Greek, not a Latin, 
sound. Bohemian and Russian have six, Servian and Italian 
seven, Polish eight. In order to express these numerous 
sounds Rasks adopts the Bohemian orthography, adding 
two new signs which Grimm had adopted for similar 
purposes in his German Grammar. Thus he establishes 
the following system: 

Non-aspiratetl. Aspirated. 

I. c, like Ital. pezzi (M.A. z or \). c, like Ital. cibo (MA. /,). 

II. s, like Ital. cosa (M.A. s). s, like Ital. scimia (M.A. s). 

III. z, like Ital. rosa (M.A. z). z, like Engl, pleasure (M.A. 2). 

IV. 5, like Ital. mezzi (M.A. ds). 5, like Ital. magi (M.A. g). 



Lxxn 



To these he adds two more sibilants which occur in 
Lapponian and the pronunciation of which he describes 
by ^z and dzh, while he transcribes them by 3 and 3. 

Rask admits, however, that four only are simple si- 
bilants, while the remaining six are mixtae or crypto- 
compositae : 

Purae. Mixtae. 

Nudae s, z. c, 3, 3. 

Adspir. s, z. c, 5, 3- 

The different categories of consonantal sounds which 
we represented at the end of the first chapter by means 
of English words may now be filled out by the following 
graphic exponents: — 





Mul 

a. b. 


AE. 




e. 


Semi voc ALES. 




c. 


d. 


/". 


9- 




Tenuis. ^.^^^'^ 


Media. 


Media 
asp. 


Nasalis. 


Liquida. 


Flatus 
sibilantes 
asp. len 


I. 


Guttur. k k/i 





gh 


N (ng) 


'h 


'h 'h 


II. 


Pal. k kh 


9 


gh 


^^ (ny) 


y 


s z 


III. 


Dent. t t/i 


d 


dh 


n 


1(0 


s z 


IV. 


Ling. t th 


d 


dh 


n 


r(r) 


sh - 


V. 


Labial, p p/i 
Spiritus asper: 'h. 
Spiritus lenis; '. 


b 


hh 


m 


w 


f V 



Although these exponents of the physiological cate- 
gories of articulated sound have not been chosen because 
their present pronunciation in English, or French, or 
German is nearest to that physiological category which 
each has to represent, still, as we have avoided letters 
of which the pronunciation fluctuates very much (such as 
c, j, X, q), it will be found, on the whole, that little 
violence is done by this alphabet to the genius of any 
of these languages, and that neither an Englishman, nor 
a German, nor a Frenchman will ever feel much hesita- 
tion as to how any one of our letters should be pro- 
nounced. 

Objections have been raised against Italics , because it 
is said they look ugly. Now this objection I must con- 



LXXllI 



fess, fails to convince me. Letters are intended for a 
distinct purpose, and if they answer that purpose, we have no 
right to expect that they should at the same time pro- 
duce an artistic effect upon our senses. Hieroglyphic 
letters might be called beautiful or ugly, but all other 
alphabets withdraw themselves from , .aesthetic" criticism, 
and must be judged by their utility alone. If we allow 
ourselves to be influenced by similar considerations, we 
shall soon find that some critics will object to dots over 
the i, others to capitals, as is the case in some German 
publications, others to a t because it towers above, or 
to a p because it falls below the other letters, and thus 
disturbs the harmony of a line. How much can be done, 
however, to remove even this fanciful objection, will be 
seen by the new Italic types which have been devised 
for the Missionary Alphabet by Mr. Auer, the distin- 
guished Director of the Imperial Press at Vienna. 

But while I decline to listen to these aesthetic ob- 
jections, I feel the weight of another argument brought for- 
ward by Mr. Ellis. "The common fount, he says, con- 
sists of large and small capitals, lower-case, numerals 
and points. Most founts are furnished with Italics, but 
as these are sloping letters and the others upright, the 
union of the two in one word is dazzling to the eye. 
As also the Roman and Italic founts are kept in cases 
laid side by side, the intermingling of letters from the 
two founts would become exceedingly laborious to the 
compositor. Accented letters are often not supplied at 
all to founts , especially to such as are found in country- 
places , colonies , and missionary stations , where a Latinic 
alphabet is a great desideratum. Even where found, they 
only exist in very small quantities. They are also 
dazzling to the eye, and very troublesome to the com- 
positor. On the other hand, small capitals are so nearly of 
the same size and cut as lowercase letters , that they 
"work" very respectably side by side. They lie, too, 
in the "upper- case," just under the hand of the com- 
positor, and are furnished in tolerably large quantities to 
all founts." 



LXXIV 



As to the dazzling effect of Italics, I have only to 
say that Italics are dazzling till the eye gets accustomed 
to them, and that all new and unusual types will at first 
be dazzling. What can be more dazzling than such let- 
ters as t, 1; n, m, u; placed in juxta position? Yet 
every child masters them, and nobody complains. Now 
Italics have lately been used to a considerable extent in 
transcribing foreign languages, and the effect has been 
very satisfactory. Dr. Sprenger in his valuable and vo- 
luminous works on Arabic literature employs Italics for 
diacritical purposes; so does Dr. Weber in his Sanskrit 
publications. Even in political works, such as the Coorg 
Memoirs, published in 1855, Italics are used with very 
great effect. Mr. Ellis himself employs Italics, and their 
use is decidedly spreading. 

But if the other objections which Mr. Ellis starts 
against Italics, are founded, there is no reason why Ita- 
lics should not be replaced by more convenient types. 
All I insist on is this , that there should be one class of 
simple or base -letters; and that there should be a se- 
cond and third class of modified letters, expressive of the 
first and second degrees of modification as explained in 
the physiological alphabet. If anybody prefers to use 
red letters for the first, and blue for the second class, I 
see no greater objection to this than if small Capitals, or even 
inverted types or mutilated types are used instead of Ita- 
lics. Only the three classes of simple and modified let- 
ters must be kept distinct. An interesting illustration of 
this is given in the Tamil Grammar and Reading book, 
just published by Dr. Graul. In the first portion of this 
work he expresses the Unguals by dots underneath, the 
palatals by accents above , the aspirated letters by a spi- 
ritus asper &c.; but in the second portion, in his Tamil 
grammar , he avoids dotted and accented letters, and uses 
instead, not Italics, but very broad or fat types. Thus 
he expresses the Unguals no longer by t, n, r, but by t, 
n, r- If anybody likes these types better, their substitu- 
tion for Italics does not interfere at all with the univer- 
sal character of the Missionary Alphabet, for it is easy 



LXXV 



to discover by the frequency of some and the scarcity 
of other modified types , which are meant to express the 
modifications of the first and of the second degree. As 
to myself, I retain Italics for the first, and I adopt 
Small Capitals for the second degree of modification, be- 
cause I believe that on the whole these two classes of 
letters are more easily to be procured in any part 
of the world, than any other two classes of modified 
types. 

Vowels. 

The pronunciation of the vowels is more liable to 
change than that of the consonants. Hence we find that 
literary languages, which retain their orthography in spite 
of changes in pronunciation, have no scruple in expres- 
sing different sounds by the same sign. Again, where two 
originally different vowels have sunk down to one and 
the same intermediate sound, we see this same sound 
expressed often by two different vowels. In the selection, 
therefore, of letters to express the general vowel sounds 
of our physiological alphabet, we can pay less attention 
to the present value of each vowel sign in the spoken 
languages of Europe than we did with the consonants. 
And as there it was impossible, without creating an un- 
Avieldy mass of consonantal signs, to express all the 
slight shades of pronunciation by distinct letters, we shall 
have to make still greater allowance for dialectical va- 
rieties in the representation of vowels, where it would 
be hopeless should we attempt to depict in writing every 
minute degree in the sliding scale of native or foreign 
pronunciation. 

The reason why, in most systems of phonetic tran- 
scription, the Italian pronunciation of vowels has been 
taken as normal, is, no doubt, that in Italian most vowel 
signs have but one sound, and the same sound is gene- 
rally expressed by one and the same vowel. We pro- 
pose, therefore, as in Italian, to represent the pure gut- 
tural vowel by a, the pure palatal vowel by i, and the 
pure labial vowel by u. 



LXXVi 



Besides the short a, we want one, or according to 
others , two graphic signs to represent the neutral 
sound of the vocal breathing, which may be modi- 
fied by a slight and almost imperceptible palatal or 
labial pressure. This produces the sounds which we 
have in birch and work, and which, where they must 
be distinguished, we propose to write e and o. As we 
do not want the signs of " and ~ to mark the quantity 
of vowels, we may here be allowed to use this sign" to 
indicate indistinctness rather than brevity. 

In most languages, however, one sign will be suffi- 
cient to express this primitive vowel; and in this case 
the figure O has been recommended as a fit representa- 
tive of this undetermined vowel. 

Among the languages which have an alphabet of their 
own, some, as, for instance, Sanskrit, do not express 
these sounds by any peculiar sign, but use the short a 
instead. Other languages express both sounds by one 
sign; for instance, the Hebrew Shewa, the pronunciation 
of which would naturally be influenced, or, so to say, 
coloured either by the preceding or the following letter. 
Other idioms again, like Latin, seem to express this indistinct 
sound by e, i, or u. Thus besides the long e in res and 
the short e in celer, we have in Latin the indistinct e in 
words like adversum and advorsum, Septimus and 
septumus, where the Llindus write uniformly sap tarn a, 
but pronounced it probably with vowels varying as in 
Greek and Latin. Besides the long o in odi, and the 
short o as in moneo, we have the instinct o or u in 
orbs or urbs, in bonom or bonum. In Wallachian, 
every vowel that has been reduced to this obscure, in- 
definite sound, is marked by an accent, a, e, i, 6, u; 
but if Wallachian is written with Cyrillic letters , the Yerr 
(1>) is used as the uniform representative of all these 
vowels. In living languages one sign, the figure 0, will 
be found sufficient, and in some cases it may be dispen- 
sed with altogether, as a slight Shewa sound is necessa- 
rily pronounced, whether written or not, in words such 
as mil-k, mar-sh, el-m, &c. The marks of quantity, 



LXXVII 



" and ~, are superfluous in our alphabet; not that it is 
not always desirable to mark the quantity of vowels, but 
because here again, as with the dotted consonants, a long- 
syllable can be marked by the vowel in Italics, while 
every other vowel is to be taken as short. Thus we 
should write in English bath, bar, but above, bank; 
rav^ne, and pin; but (i. e. boot), and butcher. We 
should know at once that a in bath is long, while in 
above it is short, though I admit that a line over the 
vowel (a, 1, u) would not cause any serious inconvenience. 

All compound vowel sounds should be written accor- 
ding to the process of their formation. Two only, which 
are of most frequent occurrence, the guttural short a, 
absorbed by either i or u, might perhaps be allowed to 
retain their usual signs, and be written e and o, instead 
of ai and au. The only reason, however, which can be 
given for writing e and o, instead of ai and au , is that 
we save a letter in writing; and this, considering how 
many millions of people may in the course of time have 
to use this alphabet, may be a saving of millions and 
millions of precious seconds. The more consistent way 
would be to express the gutturo - palatal sound of the 
Italian e by ai, the a being short. The French do the 
same in aimer, while in English this sound is expressed 
by ey in prey, by a in gate, and by ai in sailor. 
The gutturo-labial sound of the Italian o should consistently 
be written au, which the French pronounce o. For etymo- 
logical purposes this plan would be preferable, as it 
frequently happens that an o (au), if followed by a 
vowel, has to be pronounced av. Thus in Sanskrit bh?^, 
to be, becomes bhau (pronounced bho), and if followed 
by ami, it becomes bhav-ami, I am. 

The diphthongs, where the full or long guttural a is 
followed by i and u, must be written ai and au. To 
buy would have to be written bai; to bow, bau. 
Whether au coalesce entirely, as in German, or less so, 
as in Italian, is a point w^hich in each language must be 
learned by ear, not by eye. 

Most people would not be able to distinguish between 



LXXVIIl 



(li and ei. Still some maintain that there is a difference; 
as, for instance, in German kaiser and eis. Even in 
English the sound of ie in he lies is said to be dif- 
ferent from that of he lies. Where it is necessary to 
mark this distinction, our diagram readily supplies <7i 
and ei. 

The diphthong eu is generally pronounced so that the 
two vowels are heard in succession, as in Italian Eu- 
ropa. Pronounced more quickly, as, for instance, in 
German , it approaches to the English sound of oy in 
boy. According to our diagram, we should have to 
write ei and eu; but ei and eu will be preferable for 
practical purposes. 

The same applies to the dipthong oi. Here , also, 
both vowels can still be heard more or less distinctly. 
This more or less cannot be expressed in writing, but 
must be learned by practice. 

The last diphthong, on the contrary, is generally pro- 
nounced like one sound, and the deep guttural seems 
to be followed, not by the vowel u, but only by an 
attempt to pronounce this vowel, which attempt ends, as 
it were, with the semi -vowel w, instead of the vow^el. 
In English we have this sound in bo ught, aught, saw^; 
and also in fall and all. 

The proper representation of these diphthongs w^ould 
be 6i and ou; but oi and ou will be found to answer 
the purpose as well, except in philological works. 

For representing the broken sounds of a, o, u, which 
we have in German vater, ho he, giite, in the French 
pretre, peu, and une but which the English avoids 
as sounds requiring too great an effort, no better signs 
offer themselves than a, o, ii. They are objectionable 
because they are not found in every English fount. For 
the Tataric languages a fourth sound is required, a bro- 
ken or soft i. This, too, we must write i. 

The Sanskrit vowels, commonly called lingual and 
dental, are best expressed by ?i and /i, where, by wri- 
ting the r and / as italics , no ambiguity can arise be- 
tween the vowels 7 i and Ii , and the semi-vowels r and 1, 



LXXIX 



followed by i. Instead of i, e also or the figure may 
be used. 

Thus have all the principal consonantal and vowel 
sounds been classified physiologically and represented gra- 
phically. All the distinctions which it can ever be im- 
portant to express have been expressed by means of 
the Roman alphabet without the introduction of foreign 
letters, and without using dots, hooks, lines, accents, 
or any other cumbersome signs. I do not deny that for 
more minute points, particularly in philological treatises, 
new sounds and new signs will be required. In Sanskrit 
we have Visarga and the Anusvara (the Nasikya) , 
which will require distinct signs (h, ni) in transliteration. 
In some African languages, clicks, unless they can be 
abolished in speaking, will have to be represented in 
writing. On points like these an agreement will be diffi- 
cult, nor would it be possible to provide for all emer- 
gencies. It is an advantage, however, that we still have 
the c, j, and x at our disposal to express the dental, 
palatal, and lateral clicks. Further particulars on this 
and similar points I must reserve for a future occasion, 
and refer the reader, in the mean time, to the very 
able article of the Rev. L. Grout, alluded to before. 
But I cannot leave this subject without expressing at 
least a strong hope that, by the influence of the Missio- 
naries, these brutal sounds will be in time abolished, at 
least among the Kaffirs, though it may be impossible to 
eradicate them in the degraded Hottentot dialects. It is 
clear that they are not essential in the Kaffir languages, 
for they never occur in Sechuana and other branches of 
the great Kaffir family. 

If uniformity can be obtained with regard to the 
forty -four consonantal and the twenty -four vocal sounds, 
which are the principal modulations of the human voice 
fixed and sanctioned in the history of language , so far 
as it is known at present; if these sounds are accepted, 
as defined above , solely on physiological grounds , and 
henceforth expressed by those letters alone which have 
been allotted to them solely for practical reasons, a great 



LXXX 



step will have been made towards facilitating the intel- 
lectual intercourse of mankind and spreading the truths 
of Christianity. 

But the realisation of this plan wall mainly depend, 
not on ingenious arguments, but on good -will and candid 
co-operation. 

III. 

Hoiv can this Physiological Alphabet be applied to existing 
Languages ? 

a. To unwritten Languages. 

After the explanations contained in the first and se- 
cond parts, there is little more to be said on this point. 

The missionary who attempts to write down for the 
first time a spoken language, should have a thorough 
knowledge of the physiological alphabet, and have prac- 
tised it beforehand on his own language or on other dia- 
lects the pronunciation of which he knows. 

He should put from recollection, as much as possible, 
the historical orthography of German, English, French, 
or whatever his own language may be, and accustom himself 
to write down every spoken sound under the nearest 
physiological category to which it seems to belong. He 
should first of all endeavour to recognise the principal 
sounds, guttural, dental, and labial, in the language he 
desires to dissect and to delineate; and where doubtful 
whether he hears a simple or a modified secondary sound, 
such as have been described in our alphabet, he should 
always incline to the simple as the more original and 
general. 

He should never be guided by etymological impres- 
sions. This is a great temptation, but it should be re- 
sisted. If we had to write the French word for knee, 
we should feel inclined, knoAving that it sounds (/uiokyo 
in Italian and genu in Latin, to write it ^enu. But in 
French the initial palatal sound is no longer produced 
by contact, but by a sibilant fiatus, and we should 



LXXXI 



therefore have to write :;enu. If we had to write down 
the English sound of knee, we should probably, for the 
same reason, be willing to persuade ourselves that we 
still perceived, in the pronunciation of the n the former 
presence of the initial k. Still no one but an etymolo- 
gist could detect it, and its sound should be represented 
in the Missionary alphabet by ni. 

Those who know the difficulty of determining the spel- 
ling of words according to their etymology, even in 
French or English, although we can follow the history 
of these languages for centuries, and although the most 
eminent grammarians have been engaged in analysing 
their structure, will feel how essential it is, in a first 
attempt to fix a spoken language, that the writer should 
not be swayed by any hasty etymological theories. The 
Missionary should give a true transcript of a spoken 
language, and leave it to others to decipher it. He who, 
instead of doing this, attempts, according to his own 
theories, to improve tipon the irregular utterance of sa- 
vages, would deprive us of authentic documents the loss 
of which is irreparable. He would act like a traveller 
who, after copying an inscription according to what he 
thought ought to have been its meaning, destroyed the 
original; nay, he may falsify unawares the ethnic history 
of the human race. 

Several sentences having been once written down, 
the Missionary should put them by for a time, and then 
read them aloud to the natives. If they understand what 
he reads, and if they understand it even if read by 
somebody else, his work has been successful, and a trans- 
lation of the Bible carried out on these principles among 
Papuas or Khyengs will assuredly one day become the 
basis for the literature of the future. 

Although the basis of our Standard Alphabet is purely 
physiological, still no letter has been admitted into it, 
which does not actually occur in one of the well known 
languages of Asia or Europe. The number of letters 
might easily have been increased if we had attempted to 
represent all the slight shades of pronunciation, which 

f 



LXXXII 



affect certain letters in different languages, dialects, pa- 
tois, or in the mouth of individuals. But to increase the 
number of letters is tantamount to diminishing the use- 
fulness of an alphabet. 

It may happen, indeed, as we become acquainted, 
through the persevering labours of Missionaries, with the 
numerous tongues of Africa, Polynesia, and Asia, that 
new sounds will have to be acknowledged, and will 
have an independent place allotted to them in our system. 
But here it should be a principle, as binding as any of 
the principles which have guided us in the composition 
of our alphabet, that 

^^No new sound should ever be acknowledged as such, 
until we are able to give a clear and scientific 
definition of it on physiological grounds." 

We are too prone perhaps to imagine, particularly 
where we have to deal with languages gathered from the 
mouth of a single interpreter, or in the intercourse with 
a few travellers , that we hear sounds of an entirely new 
character, and apparently requiring a new sign. But if 
we heard the same language spoken for a number of 
years and by a thousand speakers, the natural variety of 
pronunciation would make our ears less sensitive, and 
more capable of appreciating the general rule, in spite 
of individual exceptions. We are not accustomed to pay 
attention to each consonant and vowel, as they are pro- 
nounced in our own language; but if we try for the first 
time to analyse each word as we hear it, and to write 
down every vowel and consonant in a language we do 
not understand, say Russian or Welsh, Ave shall be able 
to appreciate the difficulties which a Missionary has to 
overcome, if he tries to fix a language alphabetically, 
before he himself can converse in it freely. It has hap- 
pened, that travellers collecting the dialects of tribes in 
the Caucasus or on the frontiers of India, have brought 
home and published lists of words gathered on the same 
spot and from the same people, and yet so different in 



LXXXIII 



their alphabetical appearances, that the same dialect has 
figured in ethnological works , under two different names. 
Much must be left to the discretion of Missionaries; for 
in most cases it is impossible to control the observations 
which they have made in countries hitherto unexplored, 
and in dialects known to themselves alone. But it will 
be found that Missionaries who know their language best, 
and have used it for the greatest number of years, fami- 
liar thus with all its sounds and accents, are least cla- 
morous for new types , and most willing to indicate in 
a general manner, what they know can never be repre- 
sented with perfect accuracy. Too much distinction leads 
to confusion, and it shows a spirit of wise economy in 
the Phenician, the Greek, the Roman, and Teutonic na- 
tions, that they have contrived to express the endless 
variety of their pronunciation by so small a number of 
letters, rather than invent new signs and establish new 
distinctions. Attempts have been made occasionally, at 
Rome and elsewhere, to introduce new letters; but they 
have failed; and though we may feel no scruple to in- 
troduce neAv signs, and marks and accents into the Afri- 
can alphabets; though ive^, with our resources, may suc- 
ceed for a time in framing an alphabet of our own where 
each letter, besides its simple value, has two or three 
additional values expressed by one, two, or three accents 
piled one upon the other, — common sense, without 
appealing to history, should teach us, that Africa will 
never bear what Europe has found insupportable. 

The following alphabet, taken out of the general system 
of sounds, defined physiologically and represented gra- 
phically in the preceding pages, will be found to supply 
all that is necessary for the ordinary purposes of the 
Missionary, in his relation with tribes whom he has to teach 
the writing and reading of their own spoken language, 
pronounced inevitably by them with shades of sound that 
no alphabet can render. In philological works intended 
for a European public, the case will be different. Here 
it will be necessary to represent the accents of words, 
the quantities of vowels, and other features essential for 

f* 



LXXXIV 



grammatical purposes. Here the larger alphabet will come 
in; and it will always prove a reserve -fund to the scho- 
lar and Missionary, from which they can draw, after their 
usual supply of letters has been exhausted. 

It should be borne in mind, that although in this 
smaller alphabet it would be easy to suggest improve- 
ments , no partial alteration can be made with any single 
letter, without disturbing at once the whole system of 
which it is but a segment. 



Missionary Alphabet. 



i. 


a, 


a 


Sam, 


psalm. 


21. 


y 


yet. 


2. 


b 




bed. 




22. 


7' 


zeal. 


3. 


d 




dock. 










4. 


e, 


e 


debt, 


date. 


23. 


9 


join, gin. 


3. 


f 




fat. 




24. 


k 


church. 


6. 


£f 




gate. 




25. 


N (ng) 


English. 


7. 


h 


(') 


hand. 




26. 


n (ny) 


Esparia, new. 










27. 


'h 


loch. 


8. 


i, 


i 


knit, 


neat. 








9. 


k 




kite. 




28. 


s 


she. 


'10. 


1 




let. 




29. 
30. 


th 


pleasure, 
thin. 


M. 


m 




man. 




31. 


dh 


the. 


12. 


11 

o, 





not. 
not, 


note. 


32. 


(e, 6) 




13. 


but, birch, work 


14. 


P 




pan. 




33. 


ai 


ire. 


15. 


r 




run. 




34. 


au 


proud. 


16. 


s 




sun. 




35. 


oi 


voice. 


17. 


t 




tan. 




36. 


ou 


bought. 


18. 


u , 


u 


full, 


fool. 


37. 


a 


Yater. 


19. 


V 




vail. 




38. 


6 


Konig. 


20. 


w 




will. 




39. 


ii 


Giite. 



If we compare this list of letters with the Anglo- 
Hindustani alphabet, so ably advocated by Sir Charles 
Trevelyan, the differences between the two are indeed 
but small; aud if we had only to agree upon a small 
alphabet sufficient to express the sounds of the spoken 
Hindustani, there is no reason why the Anglo-Hindustani 
alphabet should not be adopted. It expresses the general 
sounds which occur in Oriental dialects, and it employs 



LXXXV 



but five dotted letters, for which new types would be 
required. 

The defects of this system become apparent, however, 
as soon as we try to expand it; and we are obliged to 
do this even in order to write Hindustani, unless we are 
ready to sacrifice the etymological distinction of words 
by expressing 5^ and ^ by h, j^, ^, and (jO by s, 
ci> and io by t, and \, 3, jjo, and ^ by z. As it is 
necessary that distinct types should be selected to distin- 
guish these letters, the array of dotted letters will be 
considerably increased. Even in Hindustani we should 
have to use different diacritical marks where we have to 
express two, three, or four modifications of the same 
type; and it would become extremely perplexing to re- 
member the meaning of all these marks. Our difficulties 
would be considerably increased if we tried to adapt the 
same letters to more developed alphabets, like Sanskrit 
and Arabic; and if we went on adding hooks and crooks, 
crosses and half- moons, dots and accents, &c., we should 
in the end have more modified than simple types. 

These modified types might, no doubt, be reduced to 
a certain system; and, after determining the possible 
modifications of guttural and dental consonants, each 
diacritical mark might be used as the exponent of but 
one modification. A glance at the comparative table* of 
the different systems of transliteration will show how 
this has been achieved by different scholars more or less 
successfully. 

But it is only after this has been done, after all 
letters have been classified, after their possible modifica- 
tions have been determined, after each modification has 
been provisionally marked by a certain exponent — such 
as the accent for expressing the palatal, dots for expres- 
sing the lingual modification, — it is then only that the 
real problem presents itself: "How can all these sounds 
be expressed by us in writing and printing, without sa- 

* See Chevalier Bunsen's Outlines of the Philosophy of Uni- 
versal History , vol. II , Appendix D. 



LXXXVI 



crificing all chance of arriving in the end at one uniform 
and universal alphabet?" It is clear that every type that 
has to be compounded or cast afresh is an impediment 
in the progress of uniformity, because those w^ho have 
once provided themselves with diacritical types will not 
change them for others , and those who have but a com- 
mon English fount at their disposal will express the ne- 
cessary modifications as best they can. The question, 
then, that must be solved, is not whether we should 
take dots or hooks , which in itself is perfectly in- 
different, but whether it is possible to express all essen- 
tial modifications in such a manner as to take away 
all excuse for individual crotchets, by proposing an 
expedient accessible to every one. This can be done 
if we avail ourselves of the resources of our founts, 
which invariably contain a supply of two classes of 
modified letters — Italics and Small Capitals. Many 
scholars, from Halhed down to Ellis, have seen the use 
to which these letters can be put in transliterating 
Oriental languages; but they have not hitherto been em- 
ployed systematically. The principle by which we have 
been guided in making use of italics is this: 

As in each language jnost letters are liable to but one 
moaiflcation , let that first modification, ivhatever it be, 
be expressed by italics. 

In the few cases where a letter is liable to 
more than one modification, let the second mo- 
dification, whatever it be, be expressed by 
Small Capitals, or by any other set of letters, 
sufficiently distinct from Roman and Italic 
types. 

b. 7b written Languages. 

Though this is a question which for the present hardly 
falls within the compass of Missionary labours, still it 
may be useful to show that, if required, our alphabet 
would also be found applicable to the transliteration of 



LXXXVII 



written languages. Besides, wherever Missionary influence 
is powerful enough, it should certainly be exerted to- 
wards breaking down those barriers which, in the shape 
of different alphabets , prevent the free intercourse of the 
nations of the East. 

The philologist and the archseologist must, indeed, 
acquire a knowledge of these alphabets, as in the case 
when their study is a language extinct, and existing, per- 
haps, in the form of inscriptions alone. But where there 
is no important national literature clinging to a national 
alphabet, where there are but incipient traces of a revi- 
ving civilisation, the multiplicity of alphabets — the 
worthless remnant of a bygone civilisation bequeathed, 
for instance , to the natives of India — should be attacked 
as zealously by the Missionary as the multiplicity of castes 
and of divinities. In the Dekhan alone, with hardly any 
literature of either national or general importance, we 
have six different alphabets — the Telugu, Tamil, Cana- 
rese, Malabar, Tuluva, and Singhalese — all extremely 
difficult and inconvenient for practical purposes. Likewise, 
in the northern dialects of India almost every one has 
its own corruption of the Sanskrit alphabet, sufficiently 
distinct to make it impossible for a Bengalese to read 
Guzerati, and for a Mahratta to read Kashmirian letters. 
Why has no attempt been made to interfere, and recog- 
nise at least but one Sanskritic alphabet for all the nor- 
thern, and one Tamulian alphabet for all the southern 
languages of India? In the present state of the country, 
it would be bold and wise to go even beyond this; for 
there is very little that deserves the name of a national 
literature in the modern dialects of the Hindus. The sa- 
cred, legal, and poetical literature of India is either Ara- 
bic, Persian, or Sanskrit. Little has grown up since, in 
the spoken languages of the day. Now it would be hope- 
less, should it ever be attempted, to eradicate the 
spoken dialects of India, snd to supplant them by Per- 
sian or English. In a country so little concentrated, so 
thinly governed, so slightly educated, we cannot even 
touch at present what we wish to eradicate. If India 



LXXXVIII 



were laid open by highroads, reduced by railways, and 
colonised by officials, the attempt might be conceivable, 
though, as to anything like success, a trip through 
Wales, and a glance at the history of England, would be 
a sufficient answer. But what might be done in India, 
perhaps even now, is to supplant the various native al- 
phabets by Roman letters. The people in India who can 
write are just the men most open to Government influence. 
If the Roman alphabet were taught in the village schools — 
of late much encouraged by the Government, particularly 
in the north-western provinces — if all official documents, 
in whatever language, had to be transcribed into Roman 
letters to obtain legal value; if the Government would 
issue all laws and proclamations transcribed in Roman 
characters, and Missionaries do the same with their trans- 
lations of the Bible and other works published in any 
dialect of India, I think we might live to see one alpha- 
bet used from the "snows" to Ceylon. 

Let us see, then, how our physiological Missionary 
alphabet could be applied to languages which have not 
only an alphabet of their own, but also an established 
system of orthography. 

We have here to admit two leading principles: — 

First, that in transliterating written languages^ every 
letter, however much its pronunciation may vary, should 
ahvays be represented by the same Roman type , and that 
every Roman type should always represent the same 
foreign letter, whatever its phonetic value may be in diffe- 
rent combinations. 

Secondly , that every double letter, though in pronun- 
ciation it may be simple, should be transliterated by a 
double letter, and that a single letter , although its pro- 
nunciation be that of a double letter, shoidd be translite- 
rated by a single letter. 

If these two principles be strictly observed, everyone 
will be able to translate in his mind a Canarese book, 
written with Roman letters, back into Canarese letters. 



LXXXIX 



without losing a tittle of the peculiar orthography of Can- 
arese. If we attempted to represent the sounds in 
transcribing literary languages, we should be unable to 
tell how, in the original, sounds admitting of several 
graphic representations were represented. In written lan- 
guages , therefore , we must rest satisfied with translitera- 
ting letters, and not attempt to transcribe sounds. 

This will cause certain difficulties, particularly in lan- 
guages where pronunciation and spelling differ considerably. 
In Arabic we must write al rahman, though we pro- 
nounce arrahman; and even in Greek, if we had to 
transliterate SY^^C^ we should, no doubt, have to w^ite 
eggus, though none but a Greek scholar would know 
how to pronounce this correctly (engiis). In Armenian 
e and o are now pronounced ye, we, or ie, ue; but in 
transliterating Armenian texts we must write e and o, 
and leave the pronunciation to be learned from grammars.* 
If, instead of imitating the letters, we attempted to re- 
present their proper pronunciation at a certain period of 
history, how should it be known, for instance, in tran- 
scribing the French of the nineteenth century, whether "su" 
stood for "sou," halfpenny, or "sous," under, or "soul," 
tipsy. In historical languages the system of orthography 
is too important a point to be lost in transcribing, though, 
it is a mistake to imagine that in living languages all 
etymological understanding would be lost if phonetic re- 
forms were introduced. The change in the pronunciation 
of words, though it may seem capricious, is more uni- 
form and regular than we imagine; and if all words were 
written alike according to a certain system of phonetics, 
we should lose very little more of etymology than we 
have already lost. Nay, in some cases, the etymology 
would be re-established by a more consistent phonetic 
spelling. If we wrote foreign forcn, and sovereign, 
soveren, we should not be led to imagine that either 
was derived from reign, regnum, and the analogy of 
such words as Africen would point out foranus or 

* See Rask 1. c. p. 13. 



xc 



foraneus as the proper etymon of foren. But although 
every nation has the right to reform the orthography of 
its language, with all things else, where usage has too 
far receded from original intention, still, so long as a 
literary language maintains its historical spelling, the prin- 
ciple of transliteration must be to represent letter by letter, 
not sound by sound. 

Which letter in our physiological alphabet should be 
fixed upon as the fittest representative of another letter 
in Arabic or Sanskrit, in Hindustani or Canarese, must 
in each case depend on special agreement. If we found 
that W in Sanskrit had in most words the nature of the 
guttural spiritus, we should have to write it '^ or h, even 
though in some respects it may represent the guttural 
liquid. If ^ in Hebrew can be proved to have been ori- 
ginally the simple guttural liquid, it will have to be writ- 
ten 'h, even though it was pronounced as semi-vocalis 
fricata '/i, as guttural media aspirata (gh), or not pro- 
nounced at all. Likewise, if English were to be trans- 
literated with our alphabet, we should not adopt any of 
the principles of the Fonetic Nus; but here also, if 
the letter h had once been fixed upon as on the whole the 
fittest representative of the English letter h, we should 
have to write it even where it was not pronounced, as 
in honest. 

It will be the duty of Academies and scientific socie- 
ties to settle, for the principal languages, which letters 
in the Missionary alphabet will best express their cor- 
responding alphabetical signs. 

The first question, taking a type, for instance, of the 
Sanskrit alphabet, would be, "What is its most usual and 
most original value?" If this be fixed, then, "Is there 
another type which has a better claim to this value?" 
If so , their claims must be weighed and adjusted. When 
this question is settled , and the physiological category is 
found under which the Sanskrit type has its proper place, 
we have then to look for the exponent of this physio- 
logical category in the Missionary alphabet, and hence- 
forth always to transliterate the one by the other. 



Physiological Definition. 
Consonant s. 



Missionary Alphabet. 



Base- 
Letters. 



Modifi- 
cations of 
the first 



Modifi- 
cations of 
the second 



degree. degree 



A p p r X i ff 



Linguales 

46 Liquida 

47 „ fricata 

48 „ diacritica 

49 Flatus asper 

50 „ lenis 

Labiales 

51 Tenuis 

52 „ aspirata 

53 Media 



54 



aspirata 



55 Tenuissima 

56 Nasalis 

57 Liquida 

58 Flatus asper 

59 ,, lenis 

60 Anusvara 

61 Visarga 

Vowels. 

1 Neutralis 

2 Laryngo-palatalis 

3 „ labialis 

4 Gutturalis brevis 

5 „ longa 

6 Palatalis brevis 

7 „ longa 

8 Dentalis brevis 



sh 
(zb) 

P 
ph 

b 
bh 

m 
w 
f 

V 



(a) 



(0 



correre, Ii 
cur 

W, San ski 



pan 

top - heavy- 
bed 

club-house 
pait, Ethio 
mill 
will 
life 
live 

Sanskrit 
Sanskrit 



(beggar, f 
} but, bloo 
dirt, whirl 

work, wor 

Sam 

psalm 

knit 

neat 

friendly 



Gutturales 

i Tenuis 

2 „ aspirata 

4 „ aspirata 

Tenuissima 

6 Nasalis 

7 Liquida 

8 Spiritus asper 



Flatus asper 

1 „ lenis 

2 „ asper iricatus 
lenis fricatus 



13 „ 1 

Palatales 

14 Tenuis 

15 „ aspirata 

16 Media 

17 „ aspirata 

1 8 „ Nasalis 

19 Liquida 

20 Flatus asper 

21 „ lenis 

22 „ asper assibilatus 

23 „ Ifinis assibilatus 

' "^ Dentales 

24 Tenuis 



25 „ 

26 „ 

27 Medif 



aspirata 



28 „ aspirata 

29 „ assibilata 

30 Tenuissima 



31 „ assibilata 

32 Nasalis 

33 Liquida 

34 „ mollis 

35 „ diacritica 

36 Flatus asper 1 

37 „ asper 2 



38 „ lenis 

39 „ asperrimus 

40 „ diacriticus 

Linguales 

41 Tenuis 

42 „ aspirata 

43 Media 

44 „ aspirata 

45 Nasalis 



Ch) 



S(/) 



gate 
springhead 



t , Arabic 

ear 

loch 

tage, German 

-^ , Arabic 

E, Arabic 

church* 

church -history 

joUy 

bridge -house 

signe, French 

yet 

ich, German 

taglich, German 

sharp 

pleasure 



thin 

dock 

landholder 

though 

ia, Arabic 

ji, Arabic 

not 

let 

moglie, Italian 

TamU, Welsh, &c. 

grass 

Hebrew D 



^, Sanskrit 



(To page xc[.) 



e) c) 



(-; 



;(^) 
up(s) 



5fy) 



D 



ale pronunciation. 


c 


3 


.2 




CO 
be 


(5 


1 




talian 


\ 


; 


; 


; 


T 


1 


^ 


J 




















^it 




• • 




u^ 


w 






tP 


pic 


>1 


o 


V 


«w9 

V 






q) 


u 


■ST 


r 


r 


r 




D 
1 




L£> 
61/ 














• • 


' 










ather, dirt, work, 
d, double &c. 
'd 










Id 


















■ 


t 

f5y 






1 

T 
1 

4 


t 




A) 

J 


IT' 










■■ 


MMM 






' — 



XCI 



The following lists will show how some of the Ariaii, 
Semitic, and Turanian languages can be transliterated ; we 
have purposely selected those which have the most com- 
plete and difficult alphabets. Objections, I am aware, 
can hardly fail to be raised on several points, because 
the original character of several Hebrew, Arabic, and 
Sanskrit letters has been so frequently controverted. If 
the disputed value of these letters can be clearly settled 
by argument , be it so ; and it will then never be difficult 
to find the exponent of that physiological category to 
which it has been referred. Failing this, the question 
should be decided by authority or agreement; for, of two 
views which are equally plausible , we must, for practical 
purposes, manifestly confine ourselves to one. 



CONTENTS. 



PAGE 

Preface in 

Proposals for a Missionary Alphabet xv 

Variety of Languages spoken in the Seat of War 1 

Difficulty of acquiring Foreign Languages generally exaggerated i 

Coincidences between different Languages . 3 

Comparative study of Languages and its practical advantages 4 
The different degrees of relationship between Languages, and 

the means of determining them 6 

Grammar, the only decisive evidence of relationship between 

Languages , • ■ • 7 

Resemblance of the grammatical outlines of cognate Lan- 
guages 10 

Three systems of grammar and three Families of Languages, 

Semitic, Arian, Turanian 10 

Pronouns, Numerals, and Particles, as means of determining 

the relationship of languages 12 

Practical results of the study of cognate Languages .... 14 
Meaning of words restored by Comparative Philology .... 16 
(Etymology of Pagan, Companion, Peasant, Savage, 
Villain, Infantry, Pioneer, Cavalry, Artillery, Inge- 
nieur. Sapper, Miner, Cannon, Soldier, Musket, Cor- 
poral, Captain, General, Colonel, Lieutenant, Serjeant, 
Brevet, Brief, Guards, Forage, Marshal.) 
Meaning of grammatical forms restored by Comparative Phi- 
lology 19 

Practical advantages to be derived from grammatical com- 
parisons 20 

On the formation of Particles in modern Languages .... 21 

Classification of Languages 22 

L Semitic Family , 23 

Its three branches, Aramaic, Hebrew, and Arabic 23 

Additional Languages, belonging to the Semitic Family ... 23 

1. Egyptian and Coptic. 24 

2. Berber Dialects in Africa 24 

3. Babylonian and Assyrian 24 

4. Aramaic, including Syriac and Chaldaic 25 

5. Hebrew 25 

6. Arabic, including the Himyaritic, Ethiopic, and Am- 
haric 26 

Characteristic features of the Semitic Family 27 



XCIV 



PAGE 

11. Arian Family 27 

Language of India, Sanskrit, Prakrit, Pali, and Modern 

Dialects 30 

Language of the Siah-posh, and of the Gipsies 31 

Languages of Media and Persia, Zend, Cuneiform Inscrip- 
tions, Pehlevi, Pazend, and Modern Dialects 32 

Language of the Afghans 32 

Language of the People of Bokhara 33 

Language of the Kurds 33 

Language of Armenia 34 

Language of the Os or Iron in the Caucasus 34 

Language of the Celts 36 

Language of Greece 37 

Language of Italy. 37 

Modern Romance Languages 37 

Wallachian, its two dialects, Daco-Romanic and Macedo- 

Romanic; its early history 38 

Territorial limits of the Northern Wallachian 39 

Territorial limits of the Southern Wallachian, spoken by the 

Massarets, the Great Wallachians, and Bovians ...... 44 

The Wallachian Grammar 43 

The Wallachian Alphabet 45 

The Cyrillic Alphabet 46 

Modern Greek 49 

Albanian 50 

Territorial limits of Albanian and Modern Greek 56 

Teutonic Languages 63 

Low German Branch, comprising Gothic, Saxon, Anglo-Saxon 63 

High German Branch 64 

Windic Languages 65 

The Lettic Branch, comprising the Lithuanian, Old Prussian, 

and Lettish 66 

The Slavonic Branch, comprising the South-Eastern and 

Western Dialects 67 

Relation of the South-Eastern and Western Slavonic Lan- 
guages 68 

Area occupied by Slavonic Languages 69 

South-Eastern Branch 70 

Territorial limits of Russian 70 

1. Language of the Great-Russians 70 

2. Language of the Little-Russians 70 

3. Language of the White-Russians 71 

Territorial limits of Bulgarian 72 

Territorial limits of Illyrian 73 

Frontier between Servian and Illyrian (Slovenian and 

Kroatian) • . 75 

Krotian, Slovenian, Servian 76 

Western Branch 78 

Polish 78 

Bohemian 79 

Slovakian 80 

Wendian or Lusatian 81 

Statistical Tables showing the distribution of the Slavonic 



xcv 



PAGE 

races, according to the language, religion, and the states to 

which they belong 81 

Political position of the Great-Russians 82 

Genealogical Table of the Arian Family 84 

III. Turanian Family 86 

Character of Turanian or Nomad Languages 86 

Morphological Coincidences of Turanian Languages 89 

The system of Agglutination, characteristic of Turanian Lan- 
guages 90 

Integrity of Turanian roots 91 

Divergence of Turanian dialects 92 

Turanian Languages approaching to an Arian type 94 

Tungusic Branch 95 

Mongolic Branch 95 

Origin of the name Tataric 96 

The Mongolic Conquests 97 

Mongolic Dialects - 98 

Turkic or Tataric Branch 99 

Turkish or Osmanli 100 

Ancient Seats of Turkic Tribes 101 

Turkmans or Kisilbas 102 

Usbeks 102 

Nogais 102 

Bazianes, Kumiiks, Baskirs 103 

Turks of Siberia 103 

Yakuts 104 

Kirgis 104 

Turks of Asia Minor and Europe 105 

Rise of the Osmanlis 105 

The Turkish Language, and Turkish Conjugation 108 

Finnic Branch 114 

Four Divisions of the Finnic Branch, Kndic, Bulgaric, Permic, 

and Ugric 115 

The Kndic Branch 116 

The Finns 116 

The Esthonians 117 

The Livonians 117 

The Laplanders 117 

The Bulgaric Branch 118 

The Permic Branch 118 

The Ugric Branch 119 

Ascending Scale of the Tungusic, Mongolic, Turkic, and 

Finnic Branches . 122 

The Northern and Southern Divisions of the Turanian 

Family 122 

Genealogical Table of the Turanian Family, Northern Divi- 
sion . 123 

Scattered Languages of the Turanian Family 124 

Caucasian Languages . 125 

Georgic Branch, comprising Georgian, Mingrelian, Suarian, 

Lazian 125 

Aboriginal Languages 128 



XCVI 



PAGE 

Lesghic Branch, comprising Avarian, and Kasikumiikian \ 28 

Akuskian, Kurian, and Mits^eghic Branch . 129 

Galgai, Karabulak, AeA^entsi, and A'erkessic Branch . . 130 

A'erkessians 132 

Abassians 133 

Historical recollections connected with the Languages of the 

Seat of War 435 

List of Grammars, Dictionaries, Dialogues . 138 



Collective names of branches and classes of languages have, as 
far as possible, been formed in icj as Georgic, Teutonic. Ad- 
jectives in ian are mostly restricted to single languages and dia« 
lects, as Georgian, Ossetian, etc. 



ON 

THE LANGUAGES 



OF THE 



SEAT OF WAR IN THE EAST. 



The languages spoken in the countries which the Variety of 

^ ^ •*• languages 

English army may occupy in the course of the present spoken in the 
war, are very numerous. Some, such as Wallachian, 
Bulgarian, Servian, Albanian, Circassian, and Georgian, 
are but little known; and as inducement has been hither- 
to wanting to study these semi -barbarous dialects, there 
are but few grammars and vocabularies from which an 
English officer might acquire a knowledge of them. Of 
others, as Russian, Modern Greek, and Turkish, gram- 
mars, written in English, may indeed be procured: but 
there are probably not many officers who mil have, in 
matter of fact, studied even these more attainable lan- 
guages before their departure for the Levant. The ne- 
cessity, however, of being able to converse with the people 
in the East, will soon be felt; and although interpreters, 
ready to offer their services for any transactions, political 
or commercial, will not be wanting, yet it is hardly ne- 
nessary to say, with the experience of so many foreign 
campaigns before us, how much an officer's discharge of 
his duties will benefit by a knowledge of the languages 
of the people among whom he and his soldiers are, 
perhaps for years, to be quartered, and on whose good 
will and ready co-operation so much of the success of 
an expeditionary army must always depend. 

The difficulty of acquiring a foreign tongue is gene- acquirm? 
rally much exaggerated. At school we spend indeed ^"^ufjps'!"'' 

1 



many years in learning Greek and Latin, and even so 
simple a language as French is not acquired by children 
without many tedious lessons from governesses or French 
masters. But it should be borne in mind that in learn- 
ing Greek and Latin as boys, we are learning more than 
a new language ; we are acquiring an entirely novel system 
of thought. The mind has to receive a grammatical training, 
and to be broken, so to say, to modes of thought and 
speech unknown to us from our own language. At school 
we have to learn Grammar at large before we can learn 
Latin grammar, or rather we learn both together, and 
therefore have naturally to spend more time on the 
two classical languages than on those which we study 
later in life. If we once have learned that the cases 
which we express by means of articles and prepositions, 
"the man, of the man, to the man, the man," may be 
expressed by a change of terminations, "homo, hominis, 
homini, hominem;" that the persons of the verb which 
we express by pronouns, "we love, you love, they love," 
may be indicated by final syllables, such as "amamus, 
amatis, amant;" we have gained knowledge which will 
prove useful to us in acquiring other languages , as 
Greek, Sanskrit, Russian, or Persian; a kind of frame- 
work, in fact, serviceable for all languages we may have 
to learn hereafter. It does not take so much time to 
impress on our memory the mere terminations of the 
ablative, or the gerund, in Latin, as to learn first what 
is meant by an ablative or a gerund. Our slow progress 
in French, again, is owing, possibly, to the manner in 
which we are taught; generally by persons who possess 
no real knowledge of the language, though they may speak 
it fluently and correctly. What can be easier than to 
explain why the masculine possessive pronoun "his" in 
"his mother," should become a feminine in French, "sa 
mere." And yet the vast majority of governesses stumble 
on this point as much as a schoolmaster who tries to 
explain to his boys the construction of the accusative 
cum infinitivo in Latin, or the singular of the verb after 
a plural neuter in Greek. And, further, it is mostly in 



French that we make our first practical attempt at ex- 
pressing our thoughts in a foreign tongue. We have to 
learn to walk on stilts, and as in every thing else, "ce 
n'est que le premier pas qui coute." But, while we study 
other languages, we acquire a general aptitude for casting 
our thoughts into foreign moulds of speech, and the task 
becomes easier at every step we make. 

After having travelled long in foreign countries, we 
readily find our way wherever we go, and what Machia- 
velli says of a general who knows otie country well, 
applies with equal force to a student of languages: "Me- 
diante la cognizione e pratica di quelli siti con facilita 
comprende ogni altro sito , che di nuovo gii sia neces- 
sario di speculare; perche i poggi, le valli, e' piani, 
e' fiumi, e' paduli che sono, verbigrazia, in Toscana, 
hanno con quelli delle altre provincie certa similitudine, 
tale che dalla cognizione del sito di una provincia, si 
puo facilmente venire alia cognizione delle altre." 

How soon do we find ourselves at home in Italian 
and Spanish if we know Latin and French! Dutch, 
again, hardly oifers any difficulties to one who knows 
English and German. Very soon we discover that after 
all no grammar contains much more than paradigms of 
declension and conjugation; and that, these once mastered, 
it is possible to go on, with the help of a dictionary, 
and to spell out short sentences , and easy books. 
Everything else is matter of practice, and partly of ta- 
lent; for it is true, that in spite of every effort, some 
people find it as impossible to master a language as to 
reproduce a melody. 

There is another fact which every one must have ,1^^°'"*^^ 
noticed in studying foreign languages. In some the gram 
matical forms which we have to learn by heart differ g'uag^e 
but slightly, and the words also frequently resemble those 
of other dialects. Compare for example the conjugation of 
the verb "to sing" in Latin, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, 
Wallachian , and French : — 



ween diffe- 
rent Ian- 



LATIN, 


SPANISH. 


PORTUGUESE. 


ITALIAN. 


WALLACHIAN 


FRENCH. 


Canto, I sing 


canto 


canto 


canto 


cantu 


chante 


Cantas, thousingest 


cantas 


cantas 


canti 


canti 


chantes 


Cantat, he sings 


canta 


canta 


canta 


canta 


chante 


Cantamus, we sing 


cantamos 


cantamos 


cantiamo 


cantamu 


chantons 


Cantatis, you sing 


cantais 


cantais 


cantate 


canlati 


chantez 


Canlant, they sing 


cant an 


cantao 


cantano 


canta 


chantent 



We find nearly the same coincidences if we compare 
English, German, and Dutch: 



I hear, 

Thou hearest. 
He heareth, 
We hear. 
You hear. 
They hear, 



Ich hore, 
Du h or est, 
Er hort, 
Wir horen, 
Ihr horet, 
Sie horen, 



Ik ho or. 
Gy hoort. 
Hy hoort. 
Wy hooren. 
Gyl: hoort. 
Zy hooren. 



It is clear, therefore, that a knowledge of any one of 
these languages will materially assist us in learning the 
others. A German finds less difficulty in learning Eng- 
lish or Dutch, than French or Italian, because many 
words in English and Dutch remind him at once of the 
corresponding forms in his own language; and, as we 
always remember most easily, if we are able to combine 
what we wish to know with what we know already, it 
follows that we shall advance more quickly in any given 
language if we are able, by comparison, to connect its 
forms and words wdth those of other idioms with which 
we are familiar. And any special study will be fitly 
preceded by an investigation of this relation between all: 
teaching us to take each language in natural sequence, 
in place of a confused pursuit of dialects that have little 
or nothing in common. 
Comparative Xhe Coincidences between languages by which even 

studv of & & ./ 

languages, the most indifferent linguist must be struck, have been 
made the subject of careful study, and a new science has 
sprung up under the name of Comparative Philology 
in which it has been found possible to arrange nearly 



all the languages of the world into classes or families, 
and to determine, by means of their coincidences, the more 
or less distant degree of their relationship. Analogies 
have been established between the most remote, and laws 
have been deduced which regulate the partial changes of 
words in their passage from one language into another. 
Now, if it is easier to remember words which are nearly 
alike, such as filius, son, Italian figlio, French fils, Wal- 
lachian fiul, it is of course a still greater aid if we know 
what changes a Latin word undergoes in passing into 
Italian or Wallachian. To take the same word filius; 
we should perhaps hardly recognise it at once in its Spa- 
nish garb, hijo. But Comparative Philologists prove it 
to be a law that every Latin fat the beginning of words 
is changed into h. Thus facies, face, is in Spanish haz ; 
facere, to do, is hacer; folium, leaf, is hoja; forma, form, 
is horma; fabulari, to speak, hablar. Hence wo know, 
once for all, that words beginning with h in Spanish may 
generally be referred to Latin or Italian words, if we sub- 
stitute f for h. 

Another general rule of practical use to remember, 
is, that Latin ct becomes in Italian tt, and in Wallachian 
pt or ft. We might, perhaps, guess ourselves that Italian 
fatto, petto, otto, cotto, are the Latin words factus, pectus, 
octo, and coctus. But Wallachian doftor for doctor, 
copt for coctus, cooked; lapte for lac, milk; pept for 
pectus, breast; asteptare for expectare, to expect, will 
be more easily understood and remembered, if we know 
that, with very few exceptions, Latin ct becomes Wal- 
lachian pt. 

That 1 may in the course of time be corrupted into 
r, we know in our own language, from the way in which 
we pronounce "colonel." But while with us this is the 
exception, it is a rule in Wallachian. In this language 
a Latin 1, between two vowels, is changed either into r, 
or into i, pronounced like the semi-vowel y. This once 
known, we have no difficulty in recognizing, poporu 
(populus), people; mora (mola), a mill; firu (filum), 
thread; ceriu (coelum), heaven; scara (scala) steps. Or 



again, fiiiu, for filius, son; muiiere, for mulier, woman; 
gaiina, for gallina, hen. 

Another useful rule is the change of qu into p, if 
followed by a. This tells us at once the meaning of 
apa, water; epa, a mare; patru, four, and so forth. 

Such examples may suffice for the present to show 
what kind of practical assistance we are likely to derive 
from a comparative study of languages. 
Degrees of Xhe relationship between languages may be either di- 

betwcen die- rect or lateral, i. e., languages may either stand to one 
guagps. another in the relation of mother and daughter, or of 
sister and sister. Italian is the daughter of Latin and 
sister to Spanish. The relationship becomes more com- 
plicated if two languages which descend from one common 
parent give rise each to new dialects. Latin, for instance, 
and Sanskrit, are sister-languages: Italian, therefore, we 
might call niece of Sanskrit, and first cousin to Hin- 
dustani. 
Means of Now, in order to determine the exact relationship of 

determining ^ ... . 

the relation- lansfuaffcs we may compare either their dictionaries or 

ship of Ian- , f ^ i ^ ._, , 1 -, 1 . li^ 

guages. then- grammars. Let us consider each method by itself. 
If we had to determine the relationship of English with 
any other dialect of Europe or Asia, and if we trusted 
entirely to a similarity of Avords, we should find that 
English shares some words in common with Welsh, others 
with German, others with French and Latin. The history 
of England gives a sufficient explanation of this, for we 
know that the ancient Britons were Celts, that they were 
driven back by the Saxons, a Teutonic race; and that 
these again were conquered by the Normans, who, although 
originally Northmen, and therefore speaking a Teutonic 
dialect, had adopted the French language before they 
invaded England. 

It is perfectly intelligible, therefore, that the language 
now spoken on British soil should be composed, so far 
as the dictionary goes, of these different elements, Celtic, 
Teutonic, and French; but if we were asked whether the 
present English is a Celtic. Teutonic, or Romance language, 
or whether it be a language mixed up of these three 



elements, on the evidence of the dictionary alone, we 
should find it impossible to give a decisive answer. 

The life and soul of a lane-uaee , that which con- Giamtnar 

... . . the only de- 

stitutes its substantial individuality, and distinguishes it cisive evi- 
, , . . dence of re- 

irom all others , is its grammar. xLvery language is at lationship 
liberty to admit into its dictionary large numbers of foreign guages. 
words, to such an extent that they may even acquire a 
numerical majority. There is, in fact, no language on 
earth which has not adopted some words from neigh- 
bouring tribes or foreign nations. But few nations have 
admitted into their grammar the terminations of other 
dialects. In English we may form whole sentences con- 
sisting entirely of either Saxon or Latin words. If we 
say, "Avarice produces misery," every word is taken 
from Latin, yet the one letter 5, in „ produces, " suffices 
to stamp the language in which it forms the exponent of 
the third person singular, as Teutonic, and not Romance. 
Again, the Turkish language is so entirely overgrown 
with Persian and Arabic words, that a real Turk from 
the country understands but little of the idiom of Con- 
stantinople, the so-called Osmanli; still all its grammatical 
elements are purely Tataric. ,,In a Turkish newspaper," 
to quote Professor Schott, in his Essay on the Tataric 
Languages . ,,the host of alien words is far superior in 
number to the genuine Turks. And yet how peculiar and 
truly Tataric this wonderful concatenation of sentences 
and intertwining of words ! A sentence runs on in long 
periods through several folio columns, like a majestic 
stream — a true image of the Turkish Empire itself: the 
governing nation in a minority as compared mth the 
conquered inhabitants, but still, through a long period of 
time, vindicating its rights with equal terror everywhere. 
The Turkish terminations and suffixes are like the small 
vassals, depending on the powerful and high-sounding- 
gerunds; and these again govern and hold together the 
larger members of a period , like so many Pashas. " 
Turkish, therefore, is a Tataric language, altogether distinct 
in grammatical character from Persian and Arabic, as 
English is a German dialect, and neither Celtic nor French. 



8 



The Anglo-Saxon was planted on the British soil where 
Celtic had been rooted out or crushed; it grew up (if, for 
clearness' sake, we may be allowed the comparison) like a 
wild fruit-tree, and the sprigs of the more refined Norman 
and Latin were grafted on it. But the original sap remained: 
— the grammar, giving life and vigour to all its words, 
native or foreign, is still pure Saxon, and through it alone 
we are able to determine, and that with certainty, the 
relationship between English and any other language in 
Europe or Asia. 

When we have to deal with ancient languages, this 
fact is of great importance. In settling the original rela- 
tionship of modern languages, we may generally avail 
ourselves of the records of history, and we should be able 
to prove, even without consulting dictionary or grammar, 
that the English could not have derived its original stock 
of words, still less its grammatical forms, from Latin or 
Hebrew. But in the ancient world we have no such 
assistance. Neither Greek nor Latin authors can tell us 
anything about the relationship between these two lan- 
guages, because the time when they formed themselves 
into separate dialects lies many centuries before Homer 
and before the foundation of Rome. What Latin writers 
assert on their OAvn language and on its descent from 
Greek is more apt to mislead than to guide us. They 
only knew the existence of a great similarity between 
Greek and Latin ; and as in their literature, in their arts, 
laws, and traditions, they were conscious of having bor- 
rowed from the ancient treasures of Greece, they inclined 
to trace their language also to the same source. And if 
a language flows necessarily from the same source whence 
a nation received the first elements of civilization, we 
should be compelled to derive German from Latin, and 
Russian from German. Facts, howewer, disprove this 
principle. So far from being derived from Greek, Latin 
has been demonstrated by Comparative Philology to be 
more primitive and original than Greek in many points 
of its grammar, in its phonetic system, and in the deri- 
vation of word>s. Latin therefore could not have been 



derived from Greek, nor, on the other hand, can Greek 
be considered as the daughter of Latin. Each stands 
to the other in the relation of sisters, like French and 
Italian, like German and English. 

If in the case of Greek and Latin, history gives no 
aid in settling their relationship, it does not oppose the 
verdict of Comparative Philology, according to which these 
two languages are to be treated as sister dialects. But 
nothing could be more in the teeth of historical tradition 
than the relationship between the languages of India and 
that of Italy, now established as firmly as that between 
French and Italian. Here, as elsewhere, the evidence of 
languages is indeed irrefragable; but here, as elsewhere, 
we must call on the assistance of grammatical compari- 
sons to make the proof complete, and to silence objections. 
If Sanskrit agreed with Greek and Latin in words only, 
we might suppose that these had found their way into 
Sanskrit through Alexander's expedition, or through still 
earlier migrations , or commercial transactions between 
the Greeks of Asia-Minor, the Persians, and Indians. It 
would be difficult to understand how words of daily 
occurrence, names expressing the simplest relations of a 
primitive society, should have been imported ready-made 
from Greece into India: yet we could not deny the phy- 
sical possibility of the supposition: and there have been, 
nay there still are, men who believe that the Hindus took 
such words as matar, mother, pitar, father, duhitar, 
daughter, from the Greek [XT^TTjp, TcaT'iQp, ^uyaiTTjp. But 
no sceptic in linguistic matters could go so far as to 
deny a natural and ante - historical relationship between 
languages which agree in their grammatical terminations 
to so great an extent as Greek and Sanskrit. If we say 
in Sanskrit, 

pita(r) dadati matre duhitaram, 
and in Greek, 

TcaxTip Sl8(ot(, [jLTjTpL ^UYaT£pa(v) , 
a sentence where not only the roots, but the derivative 
suffixes , the terminations of noun and verb , the con- 
struction, nay even the accent, agree, we find adequate 



10 

proof, to any one who is capable of appreciating philo- 
logical arguments, that Greek and Sanskrit are cognate 
languages, sprung from one common source, like Greek 
and Latin, or Italian and Spanish. 

It has, therefore, been a rule in Comparative Philo- 
logy, to determine the connection of languages, principally, 
if not entirely, by means of grammatical comparisons, 
and to use verbal coincidences merely as indications v^^iich 
should be tested and confirmed by arguments derived from 
grammar. 
Resem- Few people are aware how closely the grammars of 

blanceoftho , , •■•, j-i, i xi 

grammatical cognate languages resemble one another, when the pe- 
cognairian- culiar element that made each, in the course of time, an 
guag«^s. individual language, is abstracted. It has been found 
possible, simply on grammatical evidence, to determine 
the relationship of nearly all the languages of the world, 
ancient and modern; and if we exclude, for the present, 
the dialects of America and Africa, and the Chinese which 
is distinguished by the absence of all we are accustomed 
to call grammar, we shall find that in the whole kingdom 
of speech there are but three grammatical families to which 
every known dialect can be referred. These have been 
named the Semitic, Arian, and Turanian. The general 
principles of these three systems of grammar once mastered, 
we may comprehend the grammatical forms and devices 
of all the languages of the civilized world. 
Three sys- These three systems, however, are perfectly distinct, 

o-raniiTMi^s.'- ^^^ ^^ ^® impossible to derive the grammatical forms of 
"^Turai^an"' ^^® ^^® from those of the other, though we cannot deny 
that in their radical elements the three families of human 
speech may have had a common source. If we are sur- 
prised at the minuteness with which languages of the same 
family, though separated by centuries and by continents 
intervening, have preserved their grammatical features, our 
surprise is yet increased when we find other languages, 
perhaps less distant geographically or historically , but 
belonging to different families, differing completely in the 
application of their grammatical means. 

Two languages can hardly be more distant than the 



M 



ancient Sanskrit, spoken in India about 1000 b. c, and 
the Lithuanian spoken in Prussia at the present day. But 
a Lithuanian peasant, even at the present day, could 
almost understand a Sanskrit verb, and that one in both 
languages of the utmost frequency. He says: — 

esmi, I am, esmi, we are, 

essi, thou art, esti, you are, 

esti, he is, (esti, they are.) 

If we compare this with the corresponding forms in 
Sanskrit, Greek, and Old Slavonic, we shall be surprised at 
the strength displayed by the grammatical memory of nations. 



Sanskrit. 


Greek. 


Old Slavonic. 


asmi, 


iov^i, 


yesme, 


asi, 


iaoi, 


yesi, 


asti, 


iaxi, 


yeste, 


'smas, 


iaiii^, 


yesmo, 


'stha, 


iaxi, 


yeste, 


saiiti, 


hxL 


s6,';;te. 



But on other points also we find that these four lan- 
guages, Sanskrit, Greek, Lithuanian, and old Slavonic, do 
not differ more among themselves than Spanish, French, 
and Italian, and like these, therefore, they must be con- 
sidered as standing to one another in the relation of sisters. 
It is extraordinary that neither Greeks nor Romans should 
ever have been struck by the similarity of their own lan- 
guage with that of the barbarians. Learned Greeks of 
Constantinople must have had frequent intercourse with 
the Goths, particularly at the time when the latter adopted 
Christianity : — yet neither seems ever to have been struck 
by coincidences, frequent as the following: — 



Gothic. 
steiga, I mount, 
steigis, thou mountest, 
steigi]), he mounts, 
steigos, we two mount, 
steigats, you two mount, 
steigam, we mount, 
steigi|>, you mount, 
steiffand, thev mount. 



Greek. 
CTTsixw, I mount, 
CTzbijiiq, thou mountest, 
are^x^-) ^® mounts, 

aT£Ly^£Tov, you two mount, 
aT£LX,o(JL£v, we mount, 
aT£'!)(^£T£, you mount, 
aT£txo\jai (aT£txovTt.), they mount. 



12 

The Romans again, who since the time of Tacitus re- 
garded the Teutonic tribes evidently with a feeling of fear 
and respect, never seem to have thought it possible that 
their own language and that of Herman could have anything 
in common. And yet, words of such constant occurrence 
as auxiliary verbs were identical in Latin and in Gothic. 

LATIN. GOTHIC. 

habeo, I have, haba, 

habes, thou hast, habais, 

habet, he has, habai|3, 

habemus, we have, habam, 

habetis, you have, habai|>, 

habent, they have, habant. 

Pronouns, There are some classes of words which civilized lan- 

numerals, . . , , . i . 

and parti- guages retain with almost the same tenacity as their gram- 
means of matical forms. These are the pronouns, the numerals, 
the relation" and some of the particles. We can accustom ourselves to 
^ guages^"' foreign words for most things. We may speak of our "fusil," 
our "sabretash," our "chapeau"; but the very last words 
which we should think of borrowing from a foreign nation 
are pronouns, particles, and numerals. Thus, after the 
Norman conquest, the English language admitted French 
words largely among its substantives, adjectives, and verbs; 
but no single pronoun or numeral. ''-Trespass" was used 
instead of "sin," "country" instead of "land," "count" 
instead of "earl." But no one ever went so far as to 
speak of the "Dix Commandments," or "deux pieces de 
veal." The numerals remained the same, and the Nor- 
mans had to learn them from their Saxon subjects and 
pronounce them as best they might. Again, no Saxon 
could ever be induced to speak of himself as "je," or 
of himself, his wife, and children, as "nous." He might 
be brought to say I pay and we pay, (from the French 
"payer," and this again from the Latin "pacare," to 
pacify or satisfy one's creditors) ; but he would not stoop 
to "Je pay" and "nous pay," as little as he would use 
the terminations of French nouns and verbs. Hence the 
numerals are generally a very safe criterion of an original 



13 



relationship between languages, and the subjoined list will 
show that the difference between the numerals in Sanskrit, 
Persian, Greek, Latin, and Old Slavonic, is not much 
greater than between the numerals of French, Italian, Spa- 
nish, and Wallachian, though we know that these modern 
Romance dialects have not been separated from their com- 
mon parent, Latin, for more than a thousand years, while, 
long before Romulus and Homer, the languages of Greece 
and Italy were distinct dialects, cut off not less completely 
from the languages of India and Persia than they are at present. 

NUMERALS. 





LATIN. 


SPANISH. 


PORTUGUESE. 


ITALIAN. 


WALLACHIAN. 


FRENCH. 


1 


Unus 


uno 


hum 


uno 


unu 


un 


2 


Duo 


dos 


dois 


due 


doi 


deux 


3 


Tres 


tres 


tres 


lv6 


trei 


trois 


4 


Qiialuor 


qiiatro 


qualro 


qualtro 


patru 


quatre 


5 


Quinque 


cinco 


ciiico 


cinque 


quinque 


cinq 


6 


Sex 


seis 


seis 


sei 


sese 


six 


7 


Septem 


siele 


sete 


sette 


septe 


sept 


8 


Octo 


ocho 


oito 


otto 


optu 


huit 


9 


Novem 


nueve 


nove 


nove 


nove 


neu.f 


10 


Decern 


diez 


dez 


dieci 


dece 

L 


dix 



LATIN. 


SANSKRIT. 


PERSIAN. 


OLD SLAVONIC. 


ANGLO-SAXON. 


WELSH. 


1 Unus 


eka 


yek 


yedino 


an 


un 


2 Duo 


dvau 


du 


dova 


tva 


dau 


3 Tres 


tri 


sih 


tri 


[ni 


tri 


4 Quatuor 


A'atvar 


Aehar 


A-etoiriye 


feover 


pcdwar 


5 Quinque 


panAan 


peny 


pamte 


fif 


pump 


6 Sex 


shasli 


ses 


seste 


six 


chwech 


7 Septem 


saptan 


lieft 


sedme 


seofon 


saith 


8 Octo 


ash/an 


he.st 


osme 


eahta 


wytii 


9 Novem 


navan 


null 


devamtc 


nigon 


naw 


10 Decern 


dasan 


deh 


desamte 


tyn 


deg 



14 

Praciicai By a comparison of these lists we learn two things: 

results on ^ , , CI 

the study of nrst, that the bpanish, Portuofuese , Italian, Wallachian, 

cos^nate Ian- i -i-^ i i n • 

guages. and French numerals are all derived direct from Latin, 
and not one from the other. No single set of numerals, 
except the Latin itself, would account for the various 
corruptions which the numerals of each of the modern 
dialects exhibit. It would be impossible to derive Wal- 
lachian "optu" from Portuguese "oito,'' or French "huit" 
from Italian "otto," and Spanish "ocho"; but each of 
these forms can be explained if we take the Latin ,,octo" 
as the original type which , in the progress of phonetic 
corruption, was modified according to general and well- 
established rules in each of the modern Latin dia- 
lects. Hence, even if we had no knowledge that there 
ever was such a language as Latin, and that, after the 
downfal of the Roman Empire, it was broken up into many 
modern provincial dialects, we should be able to say, 
upon the evidence of the modern Romance idioms alone, 
that there had existed a language towards which all these 
dialects point and converge, and from which they must, 
in common, have descended. The certainty with which 
Owen, from a few individual bones, re-creates a lost 
species, furnishes here a parallel to the results of Com- 
parative Philology, so exact as to be worthy of notice. 
And many similar might be traced: for, reversing the 
historical course of language, unity is the progressive lesson 
and discovery of science. 

Secondly, from this comparison we learn that in the 
ancient languages also, as Greek, Latin, Sanskrit, Slavo- 
nic, Anglo-Saxon, and Welsh, it is impossible to derive 
the numerals of the one from those of the other. Even 
the Sanskrit numerals are not preserved in a state suf- 
ficiently primitive to allow us the supposition that from 
them those of the other ancient languages were derived, 
as the Romance from Latin, or the English from Anglo- 
Saxon. We are forced, on the contrary, to admit the 
prior existence of a language from which these ancient 
dialects branched oft', as in later times the Romance dia- 
lects from Latin; although history has not preserved even 



45 



the name of this primitive form of speech, still less its 
som'ce or its original abode. We cannot derive Latin 
from Greek, nor Greek from Sanskrit, for this simple 
reason , that on several points Latin is more primitive 
than Greek, and Greek more primitive than Sanskrit. 
The Latin "sex," for instance, has preserved the original 
s, which in Greek has been reduced to a spiritus asper, 
it would be impossible, therefore, to take the Latin sex 
as a corruption of s^. In other cases, however, Greek 
has preserved a more original form than even Sanskrit. 
For if the original form of ten was dak, the x has been 
preserved in Greek hixQL, while in Sanskrit it has been 
softened down to the sibilant s in dasan. 

It is by indications of this kind that the exact rela- 
tions of cognate languages must be determined, and a 
distinction established between lineal and collateral descent. 
We can draw from this some practical conclusions. Though 
we may compare languages which stand to one another 
in the relation of sisters, such as Greek and Latin, French 
and Italian, Russian and Bulgarian, we should never try 
to explain the forms and words on the one by deri- 
vation from the other. We must not explain otto as 
a corruption of huit, or vice versa, but derive each, ac- 
cording to rules affecting the peculiar phonetic systems 
of French and Italian, from their common source, the 
Latin "octo." If we attempted to deduce rules respecting 
the change of words between secondary languages, such 
as French and Italian, we could do so only on the sup- 
position that both dialects proceeded pari passu in their 
phonetic alteration , which may happen in isolated cases, 
but never as a rale. 

It follows again, from what has been stated before, 
that all grammatical forms, in secondary or derivative lan- 
guages , can be explained and understood in their most 
original power and meaning, if we know the primary lan- 
guage by which these forms were first created. As grammati- 
cal forms are not imported, like words, ready made, from 
a foreign tongue , no terminations for noun or verb can 
exist in Italian and Wallachian, which, after a careful 



\J 

analysis, are not reducible to Latin elements, so that in 
Latin we have the key to Spanish, Portuguese, French, 
Italian, and Wallachian; as in Sanskrit we have the key 
to Hindustani, Bengali, Mahratti, Guzerati, Asamese, 
Kashmirian, Khasiya, and all dialects descended from 
Sanskrit. An officer who goes out to India with a know- 
ledge of Sanskrit knows more of Hindustani than a cadet 
who has learned Hindustani in this country, but is ignorant 
of Sanskrit. Many rules in Hindustani grammar which 
seem irrational, and are therefore difficult to remember, 
become clear and intelligible if we know what gave rise 
to them in Sanskrit. In the same manner any one who 
desires to learn the modern Romance languages, Italian, 
Spanish, and French, will find that he actually has to 
spend less time if he learns Latin first, than if he had 
studied each of these modern dialects separately, and 
without this pre-knowledge of their common parent. 
Meaning of Besides these practical advantages, consequent on a com- 

restored by parative study of languages, few men, perhaps, will be 
Philology, insensible to the pleasure we derive from being able to watch, 
in the course of our studies, the gradual growth of any form 
of human speech. The history of words is the reflection 
of the history of the human mind, and many expressions 
which we use in a merely conventional sense are full of 
historical recollections if we can but trace them back to 
their original form and meaning. When we speak of 
pagans, we hardly remember that pagan us was origi- 
nally the same as peasant, and that it took the sense 
of heathen during times when the great cities of the Roman 
Empire adopted Christianity, while the villagers, poor and 
uninstructed, clung fast to their ancient faith and customs. 
Still less do we feel that, speaking of companions, we 
call them, in fact, co -pagans; yet companion (the French 
compagnon), is a corruption of com-paganus, one who 
belongs to the same pagus or village, — a neighbour 
where neighbours are scanty. Savage again is a name 
originally applied to people who could not be brought to 
live in towns or villages, but roamed in forests: hence cal- 
led silvatics, Wallachian silbatic, Italian selvaggio 



17 



and salvaggio, French sauvage. Villain, originally 
the name of a villager (villaneus), received its present 
meaning under the influence of medieval prejudices. In- 
fantry is derived from in fans, a child not yet able to 
speak. In fans afterwards took the sense of boy or ser- 
vant: and, as during the middle ages servants went a-foot, 
while the knights proceeded to battle on horseback, infan- 
teria became the name of foot soldiers. Whether these 
foot soldiers marched before or behind their lieges is not 
clear. Still it would seem that those who had to clear 
the way, and to look out for the enemy, were men on 
foot, for they were called pioneers, Avhich is again derived 
from the French pi on, the Italian pedone; — our foot- 
pad in the days of highway insecurity. 

Cavalry again is a name which has risen in dignity, 
for though cab all us was probably applied rather to a 
cart-horse than to a charger, caballarius soon became 
in the Middle Ages the title not only of a horseman, but 
of a chevalier. Artillery did not derive its name 
from its art: ars, like machina, the Greek ix^^)(^av7] , was 
used in the sense of an engine or engines of war; and 
hence the name of artillery. Nor are the French In ge- 
nie urs called so from their ingenuity, but because in- 
genium also was employed in the sense of an engine; 
and hence ingenarius, an engineer. Sappers and mi- 
ners derive their names from the work they have to do. 
In French sappe occurs as the name of an ancient weapon, 
a kind of spear. In the Medieval -Latin Dictionary of 
Ducange zap a is translated by hoyau, a pick axe, and 
it is frequently used in the sense of spade. The usual 
weapon carried by the sapper is the axe, but the "navvies" 
lately sent to the Crimea will have an equal right to the name 
of sapper, if not in the military, at least in the etymological 
sense of the word particularly if, as Diez supposes, zappa 
and zap pare are derived from the Greek axocTUTSLV, to dig. 
Cann on would seem the most harmless instrument if we took 
its own word for it. It is derived from canna, a cane, a hol- 
low tube; but all that a thin cane and a twenty-pounder have 
now in common is that both answer the purpose of inflicting 

9 



18 



deserved chastisement. That soldier and the French sou, 
a halfpenny , should be derived from the same word may 
appear startling; still every step can be traced by which 
these two words came to their present meaning. So lid us 
(sc. nummus) was originally at Rome the name of a standard 
sold coin, but it afterwards took the sense of coin in 
general, and soldo was used in Italian instead of pay. 
Hence so Id are, to pay, and soldato, a soldier, a man 
who receives pay — a name which might well have been 
formed in Italy during the Middle Ages, where war was 
carried on entirely by means of mercenary troops. The 
same word soldo, coin and pay, was again abbreviated 
into sol in Proven9al; and as the French frequently 
change ol into ou (as le col, Lat. collum, and le cou, 
neck or collar), sol was degraded to sou, no longer a solid 
gold coin as at Rome, but the smallest copper coin at Paris. 

Musket, French mousquet, Italian moschetto, 
was a word used long before the invention of fire-arms. 
It was the name of a sparrow-hawk, a bird serving the 
same purpose then which muskets did in later times. This 
hawk was probably called muscatus from its sprinkled 
plumage, mouchete meaning spotted, from mouche, 
musca, a fly, a spot. Another species of hawk being 
called tertiolus, another kind of fire-arm, a small pistol, 
was called in Italian terceruolo, in German terzerol. 

The corporal, unconnected with corporal punish- 
ment, should be called caporal or caporale, as in 
French and Italian. The Italian caporale is derived 
from capo (caput), the chef or chief of the regiment. From 
the same source comes captain, Italian capitano; and 
we have it under two forms, captain and chieftain 
being the same word. 

A general was so called from being the general com- 
mander, and having the general or highest orders to give 
in battle. A colonel had to command one column of sol- 
diers. A lieutenant was the locum ten ens of a superior 
officer, and in Italian he is simply called iltenente. Ser- 
geant is probably a corruption of servant, the v being 
interchangeable with g, as in William and Guillaume. 



19 

It is known that the French language, though derived 
exclusively from Latin in its grammar, has a dictionary 
mixed considerably with German words. The Franks, 
who learned to speak a Romance language, retained many 
of their former Frankish expressions, as the Normans 
retained not a few Norman words in England after they 
had adopted the Saxon speech. Many of these originally 
German, but afterwards Frenchified words, were re-im- 
ported into England by means of the Norman Conquest; 
and as English was originally a German dialect, it hap- 
pened frequently that the same word which the English 
language possessed in a pure German form, was again 
introduced under a Norman disguise. Thus brevet is 
the English brief; the former coming through a Norman, 
the latter through a German channel, both derived from 
the Latin breve, an abstract, a short note. Guardian 
is w^arden; the guards are wards; forage is derived 
from fodder, the Gothic fodr; from which Italian fo- 
dero, French feurre and four rage, and then again 
the English forage. Marshal, now the highest officer 
in an army, was no doubt taken from the French ma- 
re chal. But the French took this word from German, 
where in the old dialect marah-scalc meant a farrier, 
from marah (a mare) and scale (servant). 

Every one of these words has a long tale to tell, if 
we had time here to listen to it. How they wandered 
from one country to another; how they changed in form 
and meaning, according to the times in which they lived 
and grew up; how they withered and were forgotten, and 
then sprang again into existence ; how they were misunder- 
stood and harshly treated; how sometimes they rose to 
high honours, because no one knew their humble birth, 
and sometimes were degraded in spite of noble descent 
— all this they are willing to tell, but we must leave 
their revelations and confessions for more peaceful 

times. 

„ The meaning 
Less interestina; at first sight, but more important lor of gramma- 

. P 1 . 1 • 1 1 'Jcal forms 

determining the exact degree oi relationship between Ian- restored by 
guages, and for comprehending their gradual growth and pSogy. 



20 

ramifications, is the comparison of grammatical forms. 
We shall only take one well-known instance. The Italian 
Future canter 6, I shall sing, is evidently not taken from 
Latin: nor could the French je chanterai, the Spanish 
cantare, the Portuguese cantarei, be derived from the 
Latin cantabo. There is, however, an old Italian form 
canter -aggio, I shall sing; the termination of which 
(aggio) is known as a vulgar form of the verb lo ho, 
I have. That the auxiliary verb could be used for the 
formation of the Future, we learn from the Sardinian, 
where appu, I have, is put before the verb to form the 
same tense; appu essi, has essi, hat essi, I shall, 
thou wilt, he will be. It becomes, therefore, probable 
that cantero also was originally cantar ho, I have to 
sing, I shall sing; and that the Spanish cantare, the 
Portuguese cantarei, as well as the French je chan- 
terai, were meant to express the same as j'ai a chan- 
ter, I have to sing. The original Latin Future was lost 
probably because, with the corrupt pronunciation of the 
later Latin, it was not easy to distinguish between the 
Imperfect cantabam and the Future cantabo, and hence 
a new periphrastic form took its place. The decisive 
proof of the correctness of this view we receive from the 
Provencal language, which, as the eldest sister of the Ro- 
mance family, throws frequently considerable light on the 
early history of the other dialects. In Proven9al the 
auxiliary verb "to have" is at times separated from the 
infinitive. We find dir vos ai instead ofje vous dir-ai; 
dir vos em instead of nous vous dir-ons, expressions 
which leave no doubt as to the origin of all the Romance 
Futures. 
Practical That these linguistic discoveries can be turned to prac- 

giammaticai tical use is clear. When we know, for instance, that the 
*^^soris!'" last portion of the Future is an abbreviation of the verb 
''to have;" we know also that the terminations of the 
Future in all Romance dialects must be and are exactly 
the same as those of the Present of the auxiliary verb 
"habere." 



21 







FRENCH. 




j'ai, 


je chanter-ai 


nous avons 


nous chanter-ons. 


tu as, 


tu chanter-as 


vous avez 


vous chanter-ez. 


ila, 


il chanter-a 


ils ont 

ITALIAN. 


ils chantcr-ont. 


lo ho, 


lo canter-6 


noi abbiamo 


noi canter-emo. 


tu hai, 


tu canter-ai 


vol avete 


voi canter-ete. 


egli ha, 


egli canter-a egliuo hanno egliuo canter-anno 






SPANISH. 




Yo he, 


Yo cantar-e 


nosotros hemos 


nosotros cantar-emos. 


tu has, 


tu cantar-as 


vosotros habeis 


vosotros eantar-eis. 


el ha. 


el cantar-a 


ell OS han 


ellos cantar-an. 



As Wallachian was separated from Latin before the 
time when this new formation of the Future became fixed, 
we find that it has indeed, like its sisters, been unable 
to preserve the Latin Future in bo, but has replaced it 
in a different manner by using the auxiliary verb I will, 
instead of I have to, or I shall. The Wallachian 
Future is, Jo voiucanta, tu vei canta, el va canta, 
noi vomu, voi veti, eli voru canta. 

Words generally the most difficult to understand in 
their grammatical formation are particles, conjunctions, and 
adverbs. As they are used in almost every sentence they 
have generally suffered most from phonetic corruption. 
They are difficult to remember in a new language, because 
they seem to have no meaning in themselves, but re- 
semble mere sounds, with a conventional sense attached 
to them. Here, again. Comparative Philology offers prac- 
tical aid, disclosing the ingenious, but frequently strange 
and startling, manner in which these words have been 
formed. We thus learn to take an interest in them, and 
remember them with greater facility. This applies both 
to ancient and modern languages; only that the ancient 
particles are more difficult to decipher, because they are 
remnants of a state of language which we know only by 
means of induction. It could be shown that the Latin 
tunc is an old case of a demonstrative pronoun, and 
originally the same as the English then, taken in a tem- 
poral sense. But granting this, we find that only in 
Wallachian has this ancient adverb been preserved, and 



Particles. 



22 

even there a preposition has been added, to make its 
meaning more apparent. The Wallachian at unci would 
be adtuncce in Latin, while the old Spanish estonze 
points to Latin extuncce. But in French and Italian 
an entirely new word has been introduced, .to express with 
greater significance the meaning of then. This is the 
Italian allora, the French alors, both of which pre- 
suppose the Latin ad illam horam, at that hour. The 
same word hora may be recognized in the Spanish esora, 
ipsa hora, at that very hour, and in the French and 
Italian encore and encora, i.e., hanc horam, at this 
hour. The French desormais, henceforth, took this 
meaning, because it is really the Latin de ipsa hora 
magis, from tliis hour, while the corresponding Spanish, 
de hoy mas is an abbreviation and corruption of de 
hodie magis, from to-day. In this manner words, the 
most formal, and as it were, immaterial, take again body 
and soul, and impress themselves more firmly on our 
memory. They re-assume the character of such particles 
as nothwithstanding, however, because, in English, 
or conciossiacosache(because), nondimeno (neverthe- 
less), in Italian, where the original meaning is not yet obs- 
cured, while the component parts are still visible. 

A comparison of these words is useful again for de- 
termining the genealogy of dialects, because they disclose 
the resources from which modern dialects recruited their 
dictionary. Words of this compound nature are seldom 
transferred from one language into another: they maybe 
used, therefore, with almost as great advantage as pro- 
nouns and numerals, to determine the historical ge- 
nealogy of the different families of speech, 
ciassiflca- After having as rapidly as possible explained the chief 

'"guages!"' means by which the original relationship of languages 
may be determined, and even the points fixed at which 
certain dialects branched off from their common stem, we 
shall now proceed to give the general results that have 
been obtained by these philological researches; and in 
setting forth the outlines of a classification for the principal 
languages of Asia and Europe, we shall endeavour to 



23 

show what place each of the dialects, now scattered along 
the Danube, the Black and Caspian Seas, and the Cau- 
casus, ought to occupy in this general scheme. 

Languages in general may be divided into three fa- 
milies which have been called the Semitic, the Arian, 
and the Turanian. 

The Semitic nations appear first on the stage of Semitic fa- 
history, and their languages may be examined first: though, 
being of less importance for our more immediate purposes, 
they need not be described with the same completeness 
as the Arian and Turanian dialects. 

The Semitic family has hitherto been divided into Aramaic 

Htji)r6vv 

three branches, the Aramaic, the Hebrew, and the Ara- Arabic' 
bic. The Arabic, exhibiting the most developed, and at 
the same time, the most primitive type of the Semitic 
system of grammar, was taken as the basis, from which 
one branch of dialects spread towards the north, occu- 
pying the countries between the Mediterranean, Asia Minor, 
Armenia, and Persia, while a second branch took a southerly 
direction, and, as Ethiopic, struck roots on African soil. 
But besides the Ethiopians, the Hebrews, the Phoenicians, 
Carthaginians, Syrians, and Arabs, it will be necessary to 
comprehend within the same family, the Babylonians and 
Assyrians on one side, and the Egyptians, together with se- 
veral African tribes, on the other. The discoveries of Raw- 
linson and Hincks in Babylonia and Assyria leave no doubt 
as to the Semitic characters of the idiom engraved on the 
bricks of the palaces of Nebuchadnezzar; and ChampoUion's 
and Bunsen's researches have fairly etablished the Semitic 
origin of the language of the hieroglyphics. Yet it will be 
possible to retain the tripartite division of the language of 
Shem, as stated above, because Egyptian, and Babylonian 
though clearly marked with a Semitic stamp, represent two 
scions of the Semitic stem which branched off at a period 
of history so early, or rather so long before the begin- 
ning of all history, that they may be considered as in- 
dependent colonies rather than as constituent parts of the 
Kingdom of Shem. The same applies to Semitic tribes 



24 



in the north of Africa, the number and extent of which 
is almost daily increased by the researches of African 
travellers and missionaries. 
Egyptian. Xhe language of Egypt, as far as it has been deciphered 

from Hierogiyphical , Hieratic, and Demotic inscriptions, 
and as it is known to us again by its later representative, 
the Coptic, leans in its grammatical system towards the Se- 
mitic , but differs from it far more than Babylonian. Nay 
it may be doubted whether it is not sufficiently distinct, hi- 
storically and grammatically, to constitute a separate branch 
of speech, the Chamitic. After the 17th century, the Cop- 
tic became a dead language. At present the Copts in Egypt 
are reckoned only as a sixteenth part of the population in 
the valley of the Nile, the rest being made up of Arabs 
established there since the conquest of Omar. Coptic colo- 
nies are mentioned near the frontiers of Tunis and Tripoli, 
on the mountains Mathmathah and Nawayl, and in the in- 
terior of Africa, in the province of Ghiiber, in the midst 
of the area now occupied by the Tuarik dialects. 

Berber dia- A second lateral branch of the Semitic stem , though 

lects. ' ° 

more closely connected with it than the former, are the 

Berber dialects, spoken in many varieties all over the nor- 
thern coast of Africa from Egypt to the Atlantic Ocean; 
in fact, the speech of the people in Marocco , Algiers, 
Tunis, Tripoli and Fez, wherever it has not been sup- 
planted by the language of the conquering Arabs. The 
Semitic character of these widely-scattered dialects was first 
proved by Francis Newman; and the Haussa also is now 
considered as Semitic. Much light on the ramification of 
this Semitic family in the north-west of Africa may be expec- 
ted from Richardson's expedition, or rather from Dr. Barth, 
its only survivor, now on his way to Europe. How far 
the original area of this half -Semitic stratum of language in 
Africa may have to be extended, it is impossible to say: but 
traces of Semitic grammar have already been discovered in 
the Galla language on the north-eastern coast of Africa. 
Babylonian The Babylonian and Assyrian inscriptions are likely 

rian. " to throw much light on the early history of languages, 
because an ancient literature entombed for many centuries, 



25 



is there rising again in all its fulness, and must disclose, 
if properly deciphered, the exact image of their ancient 
dialects, fixed by contemporaneous evidence. There are 
not only names of kings and dates of battles, but, accor- 
ding to Rawlinson, the "debris" of a royal library. "On 
the clay tablets," he writes in April 1853, "which we 
have found at Nineveh, and which are now to be counted 
by thousands, there are explanatory treatises on almost 
every subject under the sun; the art of writing, gram- 
mars and dictionaries, notation, weights and measures, 
divisions of time, chronology, astronomy, geography, his- 
tory, mythology, geology, botany, &c. In fact, we have 
now at our disposal a perfect cyclopaedia of Assyrian 
science, and shall probably be able to trace all Greek 
knowledge to its source." This promises, indeed, a rich 
harvest for the linguist and the historian, but as yet all 
that can be said with confidence is that the language of 
the ancient Babylonian, and the later Assyrian kingdoms, 
bears a greater resemblance in some of its words and in 
most of its grammatical forms to the Semitic than to the 
Arian or Turanian types. The Assyrian Conjugations and 
Pronouns have been traced back most convincingly to an 
original Semitic source by Dr. Hincks. 

If we treat these three branches, the Egyptian, Ber- 
ber, and Babylonian, as cognate descendants of Shem, we 
may still distinguish them from his three agnate descen- 
dants: the Aramaic, Hebrew, and Arabic. 

The Aramaic occupies the north, including Syria, Atainaic. 
Mesopotamia, and part of Babylonia. It is divided into 
two dialects, the Syrian and Chaldean. It was reduced 
by Macedonian and Greek conquests, and after a revival 
in the 4th and 6th centuries, nearly absorbed by the lan- 
guage of the Islam. It still lives among some tribes near 
Damascus, and in Kurdistan among the Nestorians or so- 
called Chaldeans. 

The Hebrew is the language of Palestine, where it Hebrew, 
was spoken from the days of Moses to the times of Ne- 
hemiah and the Maccabees. The language of the Phoenicians 
and Carthaginians belongs to the same branch. In the 



26 

progress of history, the Hebrew was first encroached upon 
by Aramaic dialects, and at last swept away by Arabic, 
which since the conquest of Palestine and Syria in the 
year 636, has monopolised nearly the whole area formerly 
occupied by Aramaic and Hebrew dialects. 
Arabic. The Original seat of this last and most powerful branch 

of the Semitic family, the Arabic, was the Arabian 
peninsula. Here it is still spoken by a compact mass of 
aboriginal inhabitants, and the ancient inscriptions (Him- 
yaritic) attest there its early presence. In ancient times 
it sent one colony into Africa, where, south of Egypt and 
Nubia, on the coast opposite Yemen, an ancient Semitic 
dialect has maintained itself up to the present day. This 
is the Ethiopic or Abissinian, or, as it is called 
by the people themselves, the Gees language. No 
longer spoken in its purity by the people of Habesh, it 
is still preserved in their sacred writings, translations 
of the Bible and similar works. The modern language 
of Habesh is Amharic, in which the purity of the Se- 
mitic idiom has suffered from mixture with African elements. 

The great conquests of the Arabic language over Asia, 
Africa, and Europe, as the language of the Khalifs and 
the Koran, are matters of historical notoriety, and need 
not be entered into at present. Nor is it necessary for 
our purpose to give a detailed account of the gramma- 
tical characteristics of the Semitic family. The English 
army will hardly come in contact with Semitic dialects, 
except on its outward passage at Malta, where a corrupt 
Arabic dialect is spoken, greatly mixed with Italian. It 
will not have to fight in countries where the inhabitants 
speak Semitic idioms, though it may possibly have to 
charge side by side with Egyptians who speak Arabic. 
As to the 10,000 Zouaves whom the French promised to 
send to the seat of war, they will probably turn out 
Frenchmen under an Oriental disguise. The real Zouaves 
belong to the Berber branch, for in Algiers the Berbers 
are called Shawi, a word which means Nomads, and has 
been corrupted in Tunis into Suav, French Zouave. 

There is one characteristic feature which may be men- 



27 

tioned, as it suffices to distinguish a properly Semitic from chaiacter- 

' o jr x- ./ ^ jsljg pgj,. 

an Arian or Turanian lansjuase. Every root in Aramaic, tures of the 

• 1 , ./ Semitic Fa- 

Hebrew, and Arabic, must comprise three letters, while mily. 

the Arian and Turanian roots consist of one or two, seldom 

of three. Numerous words are derived from the roots 

simply by changing the vowels, and leaving the consonantal 

skeleton as much as possible intact. Semitic languages enjoy 

great liberty in the formation of new words, but they are 

confined within narrow limits with regard to their position, 

and a free syntactical arrangement of sentences is hardly 

known even to the most advanced members of this family. 

The close connection and common descent of the Se- 
mitic languages is further confirmed by the radical or ma- 
terial elements shared by all in common, and differing 
sufficiently from the roots and words of the other fami- 
lies to justify the philologist and historian in treating the 
Semitic as a distinct variety of the language of mankind. 
Although comparisons have been instituted between the 
roots of Semitic and Arian languages, still these are of 
far too general a character to allow us to suppose that 
the Arian were derived from the Semitic, or the Semitic 
from the Arian languages. Even the most distant members 
of the Arian family are in reality but modifications of the 
same mother-speech, while, after all attempts to draw the 
roots of Arian and Semitic languages more closely together, 
we cannot say more than that in their roots both have pre- 
served faint traces which point towards a common centre, 
but which it is impossible to follow much further in their 
converging direction by historical evidence, or even by 
inductive reasoning. 

The second family of languages is the Arian, or, as Arian family. 
it used to be called, the Indo-European. The latter 
name indicates the geographical extent of this family from 
India to Europe, the former recalls its historical recol- 
lections, Arya being the most ancient name by which the 
ancestors of this family called themselves.* That the 
Sanskrit, the ancient language of India, the very existence 
of which was unknown to Greeks and Romans before 
* In the later Sanskrit literature, arya means "of a good family," 



28 



Alexander, and the sound of which had never reached a 
European ear till the close of the last century, that this 

"venerable," "a Lord;" but it is no longer used as a national name, 
except as applied to the holy land of the Brahmans, which is still 
called Arya-avarta, the abode of the Aryas. In the Veda, however 
A r y a occurs very frequently as a name of honour reserved to the 
higher classes, in opposition to the Dasyus, their enemies. For in- 
stance, Rigveda 1, 54, 8: "Know thou the Aryas, O Indra, and 
they who are Dasyus; punish the lawless and deliver them unto thy 
servant ! Be thou the mighty helper of the worshipper, and I shall 
praise all these thy deeds at the festivals." And again, \ , 1 03, 3 : "Bea- 
ring the thunderbolt and trusting in his strength, he strode about ren- 
ding in pieces the cities of the slaves. Thunderer, thou art wise; hurl thy 
shaft against the Dasyu : let the power of the Aryas groAV into glory," 

In the later dogmatical literature of the Vedic age, the name of 
Arya is distinctly appropriated to the three first castes of the Brah- 
manic society. Thus we read in the 5atapatha-brahmana : „ Aryas 
are only the Brahmans, Kshatriyas, and Vai^yas, for they are ad- 
mitted to the sacrifices. They shall not speak with everybody, for 
the Gods did not speak with everybody, but only with the Brah- 
man, the Kshatriya, and the Valvya. If they should fall into a con- 
versation with a 6udra , let them say to another man , « tell this 
Sudra so.)) This is the law for an initiated man." Again in the 
so-called Atharva-veda, we read, "be it an Arya or a Sudra." 

But while this old name, "Arya," fell into oblivion amongst the 
Hindus , it was faithfully preserved by the Medians and Persians. 
In the Zendavesta, the first-created and holy land is called Airyanem 
vae^o, "the seed of the Arians," and this name was in later times 
transferred to Media, a country too far west to be mentioned in the 
Zendavesta. Herodotus was told in his Oriental travels, that the 
Medians originally called themselves "Apiot, and Hellanicus gives 
Aria as a synonyme of Persia. And now that we can read, thanks 
to the wonderful discoveries of Rawlinson, Burnouf, and Lassen, 
the same records from which Herodotus derived his information, 
we find Darius calling himself, in the Cuneiform inscriptions , " a 
Persian, the son of a Persian, an Arian, and of Arian descent." 
About the same time Eudemus, the pupil of Aristoteles, as quoted 
by Nicolaus Damascenus speaks of "the Magi and the whole Arian 
race"; (Mavot 8l xa\ Tiav to 'Apstov yevo?.) And when, after cen 
turies of foreign invasions and occupation, the Persian Empire rose 
again to historical importance under the Sassanian sway, we find 
their kings also calling themselves in the Inscriptions deciphered by 
De Sacy, "Kings of the Arian and un- Arian races." This is the origin 
of the modern name of Iran. The name of the Armenians, Agh a van, 
is derived by Bore from Agho which is Alo which is Arya, and means 



29 



language should be a scion of the same stem, whose 
branches overshadow the civilized world of Europe, no one 
would have ventured to affirm before the rise of Com- 
parative Philology. It was the generally received opinion 
that if Greek, Latin, and German came from the East, they 
must be derived from Hebrew — an opinion for which at 
the present day not a single advocate could be found, while 
formerly, to disbelieve it would have been tantamount to 
heresy. No authority could have been strong enough to 
persuade the Grecian army that their gods and their hero- 
ancestors were the same as those of King Porus, or to 
convince the English soldier that the same blood was run- 
ning in his veins, as in the veins of the dark Bengalese. 
And yet there is not an English jury now a-days, which, 
after examining the hoary documents of language, would 
reject the claim of a common descent and a legitimate re- 
lationship between Hindu, Greek, and Teuton. Many words 
still live in India and in England that \^itnessed the first 
separation of the northern and southern Arians, and these 
are witnesses not to be shaken by any cross-examiuation. 
The terms forGod, for house, for father, mother, son, 
daughter, for dog and cow, for heart and tears, for axe 
and tree, identical in all the Indo-European idioms, are 
like the watch-words of an army. We challenge the see- 
ming stranger, and whether he answer with the lips of 
a Greek, a German, or an Indian, we recognize him as 
one of ourselves. Though the historian may shake his head, 
though the physiologist may doubt, and the poet scorn the 
idea, all must yield before the facts furnished by language. 

descendants of the Aryas. Again, in the Mountains of the Cau- 
casus, we find, an Arian race, the Os, calling themselves Iron; 
Stephanus gives 'ApCa as a synonyme of Thrace, and Ario-vistus, 
the enemy of Caesar, and a tribe of Arii known to Tacitus, attest 
the presence of the same title in the forests of Germany. Thus 
we hear everywhere the faint echoes of a name which once sounded 
through the valleys of the Himalaya; and it seems but natural that 
Comparative Philology, which first succeeded in tracing the common 
origin of all the nations enumerated before, should have selected 
this old and venerable title, for their common appellation. — Edin- 
burgh Review, October, 1851. 



30 

There was a time when the ancestors of the Celts, the 
Germans, the Slaves, the Greeks and Italians, the Persians 
and Hindus, were living together beneath the same roof, se- 
parate from the ancestors of the Semitic and Turanian races. 
Sag[^tin Xhe first branch of this family belongs to India. It 

is represented in ancient times by the Sanskrit, the lan- 
guage of the Vedas, or the sacred writings of the Brahmans. 
Although this language presents the most primitive type 
of the Arian family, still it is impossible to consider the 
Greek, Latin, and German as derived from Sanskrit in the 
same manner as the Romance dialects are from Latin. All 
we can say is, that Sanskrit is the eldest sister, and that 
therefore it can, on some points of grammar, reveal to us, 
as it were, the earliest impressions of the childhood of the 
Arian family. It stands to the other languages as Proven- 
9al to French and Italian: — a relation which does not 
exclude the possibility that occasionally the younger sisters 
may have preserved their original features more distinctly 
than Sanskrit or Provencal. 

Besides the ancient Sanskrit of the Veda we can trace 
the Indian language through several later eras of its 
growth. In the Vaidik literature itself we can distinguish 
at least three periods, distinct in thought and style; and 
*■ we may safely place the time when the Sanskrit of the hymns 
of the Veda was the spoken, and not as yet the sacred idiom 
of India, about 1,500 B.C. In the sixth century B.C., at the first 
rise of Buddhism, the Protestantism of ancient India, the spo- 
ken dialects were no longer Sanskrit, but languages standing 
to it in the same relation as the vulgar to the classical Latin, 
t^'akvit, i^iii. The later dialects of India are called by a general name, 
dustani. Prakrit. If Pali, which has since become in Ceylon the sa- 
cred language of the Buddhists, was the popular idiom in which 
Buddha preached to the people, it must be referred to this 
class of languages. But, if we judge from the Gathas of the 
Buddhistic literature, the dialect in which Buddha's doctri- 
nes were first embodied, was far less corrupt than the Pali 
of Ceylon, the origin of which has therefore been referred 
to a much later period by Professor Wilson. The public 
inscriptions of the time of Asoka, / e., of the third cen- 



31 



tury B. c. , exhibit the the first traces of a secondary 
formation in the spoken language of India , if compa- 
red with the more primitive Sanskrit. Yet Sanskrit con- 
tinued for a long time after, the literary and sacred 
language of India; and in the present day the Brahmans 
are able to write and to speak it with the same facility 
as monks in the middle ages wrote and spoke Latin. We 
have the most elaborate Sanskrit grammars of the fourth 
century B. c, and the two great epic poems, the Mahabharata 
and Ilamaya??a, and the so-called Laws of Manu, date pro- 
bably though not in their present form, from the same time. 
Another period of Sanskrit literature is generally consi- 
dered as contemporaneous with the Augustan age of Rome, 
but the language in which the poems of Kalidasa, the chief 
poet of that time, are written, is of so artificial a structure, 
that it is impossible to believe this to have been at any 
time the spoken language of India. We find, in fact, that 
the same Kalidas, when he represents scenes from real life, 
as in his plays, is obliged to let his heroines and inferior 
characters speak in the soft and melodious Prakrit idioms, 
while he reserves the more dignified and learned Sanskrit 
for Kings and Brahmans. A similar mixture of Latin and 
modern dialects is found in some of the plays of the middle 
ages. After Kalidasa there have been several revivals of 
Sanskrit literature at the courts of diiferent princes, and 
up to our own times Sanskrit is read and written by the 
learned. But, since the days of Pamni, in the fourth century, 
B. c. , the classical Sanskrit shows no longer signs of either 
growth or decay. It has ceased to live, and though it exists 
still like a mummy dressed in its own ceremonial robes, its 
vital powers are gone. Sanskrit now lives only in its offspring; 
the numerous spoken dialects of India, Hindustani, Mahratti, 
Bengali, Guzerati, Singhalese, &c., all preserving, in the system 
of their grammar, the living traces of their common parent. 

Whether the Siah-posh dialect, spoken by the Kafirs Siah-posh 

^ . ' ^ *^ and Gipsv- 

in the north-eastern parts of the Hindukush, has preserved language. 
a closer similarity to Sanskrit than Bengali and Hindustani, 
is difficult to determine, till we gain more ample infor- 
mation on this language, first discovered by Sir A. Burnes. 



32 

We should not omit, however, in this place, the language 
of the Gipsies, which, though most degraded in its gram- 
mar and with a dictionary stolen from all the dialects of 
Asia and Europe, is clearly an exile from Hindostan. 

i-anguages The second branch of the Arian family is the Persian, 

of Media and _ , . . . 

Persia. which may equally be followed in its historical growth and 

decay through different periods of literature. The language 
of the Zendavesta, the sacred remnants of the Zoroas- 
trian religion; the inscriptions of Cyrus, Darius, and 
Xerxes; the Pehlevi of the Sassanian dynasty (226 a.d.), 
mixed with Semitic elements, but purely Arian in its gram- 
mar, proscribed by edict in the fifth century of our era; 
the Pazend, or Parsi, the national Persian, freed of its 
foreign admixtures, the language of the grand epic poem 
of Firdusi (1000 a.d.), and the motley idiom now spoken 
in Persia, exhibit a complete biography of the Iranian lan- 
guage, the half-brother of Sanskrit. 

There are some scions of the Arian stock which struck 
root in the soil of Asia, before the Arians reached the 
shores of Europe; but they are of far less interest for Com- 
parative Philology, because they do not exhibit by their 
literature, what is most instructive, the gradual progress of 
a growing language. These are : 

1. The Afghan, or language of the Patans, the in- 
habitants of Kabul. It belongs by its grammar to the Per- 
sian branch. The Afghans call themselves Pushtun, in the 
plural Pushtaneh, which according to Klaproth was pro- 
nounced Pu htaneh, and corrupted into Patau. The Belu/t 
also, the conquerors of Sind, the southern neighbours of 
the Afghans, speak a dialect closely allied to the Persian. 

In the Tazkirat-ul-muluk , Push or Pash is said to 
have been the name of the country where the Afghans, 
(according to their traditions, descendants of Saul, David 
and Salomon,) settled; and hence Pushtu, the name of 
the language of the country, which they adopted instead of 
Hebrew. Patau is there explained as an Arabic word, 
meaning the mast of a vessel, a title of honor, given to 
the first Afghan ruler who adopted Islam, by the prophet 
himself. 



Afghan 
language. 



33 

The Pushtu language is spoken with considerable va- 
riation in orthography and pronunciation from the valley 
of Pishin south of Kandahar to Kafiristan on the north; 
and from the banks of the Helmand on the west, to the 
Attok, Sindhu, or Indus on the east— throughout the Sama 
or plain of the Yusufzo's, the mountainous districts of 
Ba(/awer, Pan(/kora, Suwat, and Bunir, to Astor on the 
borders of little Tibet — a tract of country equal in ex- 
tent to the Spanish peninsula. '' 

2. The language of the people of Bokhara, a modern language of 

^ ^ Bokhara. 

Persian dialect, spoken originally by the Tajiks, north of 
Balkh, but to be met with in many parts of Asia, owing 
to the migratory habits of the people, well known as the 
travelling merchants of Central Asia. 

3. The lane'ua&'e of the Kurds, likewdse of Iranian Language of 

* ^ o, . t'le Kurds, 

character, though strongly mixed with Semitic words, and 
without any literary cultivation. The relation between 
Persian and Kurdian has been compared with that between 
the literary language of Italy, the Toscan, and the popular 
dialect of Milan. There are many dialects of the Kurdian 
language, and Garzoni's grammar refers to the Northwestern 
idiom of Kurdistan, This country is surrounded on the North 
by Armenia, on the East by Aserbei^an and the Persian Irak, 
on the South by Khusistan and the district of Bagdad, on 
the West by the Tigris. The nomadic habits of the Kurds 
account for their presence in neighbouring countries, par- 
ticularly during winter. Even in more distant regions, 
in Loristan as far as the Persian Gulf, in the Pashaliks 
of Haleb and Damascus, in Asia -Minor, Khorasan and 
elsewhere, Kurdish tribes are to be met with. The Zagros- 
mountains divide the whole of Kurdistan into two unequal 
parts. The country West of this line, a part of the ancient 
Assyria, betw^een the Zagros and the Tigris, belongs to the 
Turkish empire. The other part , east of the Zagros 
mountains, and forming part of the ancient Media, is 
under Persian sway. The number of Kurds is vaguely 
estimated at two to three millions. Their name has frequently 

* See Raverty in the Journal of the As. Soc, of Bengal 
No. 244. 

3 



34 

been derived from the ancient Kasdim, the Chaldeans of 
Assyria. Strabo speaks of the Kurds as Kap5ax£(; and 
Ktjotiol, Xenophon as KoLgho\)y^OL They call themselves 
Kurdman^i, according to Klaproth, or Kurman^i. Both 
names mean Km-d-men. They are divided into two classes, 
the As sir eta, or Sipah (soldiers), and the Guran or 
Rayah (subjects); the latter cultivate the soil and are of lower 
rank, the former are the nobility and live on chase and 
pillage. The Yezidis near Mossul are Kurds. With this 
exception, the race is mostly Mohammedan. 
Language of 4. The Armenian language, decidedly Arian in its 
grammar, but differing both from the Indian and Iranian 
type. The ancient Armenian is now a dead language, and 
the spoken dialect has suffered greatly from Turkish in- 
fluences. It has a rich literature, but only dating from 
the fourth century a.d. The Armenians are knowm as 
merchants in Asia and Europe, and have establishments at 
St. Petersburg, Vienna, Venice, Constantinople, Kairo, Bom- 
bay, Calcutta, Madras, Singapore, and elsewhere. 
Ossetian. or 5. Another Arian language, the Ossetian, barren alto- 
the Ti'on. gether of native literature, has been collected from the 
mouths of the people on account of its linguistic impor- 
tance. It is called Ossetian, from Osethi, which in 
Georgian means the country of the Os ; Os being the name 
by which these people, who call themselves Iron, are 
known to their neighbours. The Ossetes occupy the country 
west of the great military road which crosses the Caucasus 
from north to south. They extend to the sources of the 
Rion, and are found principally in the valley of the Terek. 
West of the fortress of Vladikaukas, they inhabit a vast 
plain which in the north is divided from the Kabardah by 
a line of mountains, called Pshe'^hesh. More northern seats, 
which they occupied in earlier times, were taken from 
them by the Mongolians. While in the North they are 
called Os, their more usual name in the South is Dwal 
or Dw^aleth. The Digores and Tagaures belong to them. 
Russian supremacy is acknowledged in Osethi, but little 
enforced. 

This language spoken in the centre of Mount Caucasus, 



35 



and surrounded on all sides by tongues of different origin, 
stands out, like a block of granite errant in the midst of 
sandstone strata, a strayed landmark of the migrations of 
the Arian tribes. Whether, howewer, the Ossetian language 
has been fixed there, since the first movements of the Arians 
from Asia into Europe, that is before the beginning of all 
political history, is a point difficult to settle. According 
to their own traditions, and the accounts of Georgian 
historians, the ancestors of the Ossetes extended formerly 
from the Caucasus to the Don, and were driven back into 
the mountains, in the middle of the 1 3th century, by Ba- 
tukhan, the grandson of Amgis-khan. Their former pre- 
sence near the Don (Tanais), however, rests on very doubtful 
evidence : the name of the Ossilians, a people whom Pto- 
lemy mentions near the mouth of that river, being the chief 
argument in favour of this view. Klaproth supposes that 
the first ancestors of this Arian colony on the Don were 
the Medians, transplanted, according to Diodorus Siculus, 
by the Scythians into Sarmatia in the 7th century B.C. 
There is little doubt that the Sarmatians were a Median 
colony of the 7th century before Christ, and that the Alanes, 
Yaxamates, Roxolanes, and Yazyges came all from the same 
source. After -Safarik's investigations, no critical historian 
can for the future treat these Sarmatians as the ancestors of 
the Slavonic nations. The question is only whether the 
present Ossetes in the Caucasus, the Ossilians of Ptolemy, 
and the Alanes or Sarmatians are one and the same people. 
Klaproth endeavours to prove that the Median colonists 
of Sarmatia and the modern Ossetes meet in the Alanes 
of the Middle Ages, and that, at the time of Constantinus 
Porphyrogeneta (948 A.d.), they lived on the northern side 
of the Caucasus and north of Kasachia. The Alanes, ac- 
cording to an Italian traveller of the loth century (Jo- 
safa Barbaro), still called themselves As, and a people 
called As or Yas is frequently mentioned in Russian chro- 
nicles together with the Kasoq, i.e. the Aerkessians, who 
were then known by the name of Kasach, a name now 
monopolized by the Cossacks, the bastard descendants of 
Slavonic, Tataric, and Caucasian tribes. But whatever the 

3* 



36 

time may have been when these As or Os settled in the 
central regions of the Caucasus, whether in the 7th cen- 
tury B.C. or at a still more remote period, in either case 
their language is a welcome link between the Arian dia- 
lects of Asia and Europe. 

European In Europe the Arian family has sent out five great 

branches, the Celtic, Teutonic, Italic, Hellenic and Slavo- 
nic or Windic. 
Language of The Celts seem to have been the first to arrive in 

the Celts. 

Europe, where the pressure of subsequent emigration, par- 
ticularly of Teutonic tribes, has driven them toward the 
westernmost parts, and latterly, across the Atlantic. At 
present the only remaining Celtic dialects are the Cymric 
and Gadhelic. The Cymric comprises the Welsh, the 
Cornish (now extinct), and the Armorican of Brittany. 
The Gadhelic comprises the Irish, the Galic of the west 
coast of Scotland, and the dialect of the Isle of Man. 
Although these Celtic dialects are still spoken, the Celts 
themselves can no longer be considered an independent 
nation, like the Germans or Slaves. In former times however 
they not only possessed political autonomy, but asserted it 
successfully against Germans and Romans. Gaul, Belgium, 
and Britain, were Celtic dominions, and the North of Italy 
was chiefly inhabited by them. At the time of Herodo- 
tus, we find Celts in Spain; and Switzerland, the Tyrol, 
and the country south of the Danube, have been the 
seats of Celtic tribes. But after repeated inroads into the 
regions of civilization, familiarizing Latin and Greek wri- 
ters with the names of their kings, they disappear from 
the east of Europe. Brennus is supposed to mean king, 
the Welsh brennin. A Brennus conquered Rome (390), 
another Brennus threatened Delphi (280). And about the 
same time a Celtic colony settled in Asia, founding Ga- 
latia, where the language spoken at the time of St. Jerome 
was still that of the Gauls. Celtic words may be found 
in German, Slavonic, and even in Latin, but only as fo- 
reign terms, and their amount much smaller than com- 
monly supposed. A far larger number of Latin and Ger- 



37 



man words have since found their way into the modern 
Celtic dialects, and these have frequently been mistaken 
by Celtic enthusiasts for original words, from which Ger- 
man and Latin might, in their turn, be derived. 

Much more instructive for an analytical study of the 
Arian languages is Greek. We have here the advantage 
that various co-existent dialects , Aeolic and Ionic, Doric 
and Attic, have happily been preserved in their undying 
literature, affording thus a complete insight into the ori- 
ginal individuality of the Greek tongue. We know which 
forms are ancient and genuine , and which of more 
modern growth; and when one dialect is deficient or cor- 
rupt, another frequently supplies the deficiency^ A lan- 
guage without dialects is like a stem without branches : it 
gives us no idea of its full powers, and allows us no in- 
sight into the secret working of its organism. 

In Italy again more than one dialect was spoken be- 
fore the rise of Rome; but scanty fragments only have 
been preserved in inscriptions of the Umbrian in the north, 
and of the Oscan to the south of Rome. The Oscan 
language, spoken by the Samnitae, now rendered in- 
telligible by the labours of Mommsen, had produced a lite- 
rature before the Romans knew even the art of writing; 
and the tables of Iguvio, so successfully deciphered by 
Dr. Aufrecht, bear witness to a priestly literature among 
the Umbrians at a very early period. But all was des- 
troyed and absorbed by the power of Rome; and though 
Oscan was still spoken under the Roman emperors, the 
only dialect of Italy which has preserved life, and rules 
even now over the greater part of Europe, was the lan- 
guage of Latium or Rome. 

The Romance languages are amongst the most inte- 
resting subjects of Comparative Philology, because we can 
watch here the gradual decay of the mother -stock, and 
the formation of the new national dialects under six diffe- 
rent phases, the Proven9al and French, the Italian 
and Wallachian, the Spanish and Portuguese, not 
to mention the numerous patois of each. We can see the 
old forms of the Latin grammar gradually losing their ex- 



Hellenic 
languages. 



Italic 
languages. 



Romance 
languages. 



38 

pressive power, and auxiliary words, such as prepositions 
and articles, coming in to form the new declensions, while 
the decaying structure of the conjugations is propped up 
by auxiliary verbs. Some of the old forms linger on for 
a time, and the new periphrastic expressions are at first 
used with a certain reserve, but at last the whole struc- 
ture of modern languages is overgrown by them. The old 
conjunctions and adverbs give way to more distinct ex- 
pressions and circumlocutions, and these, by a rapid cliange, 
coalesce again into new words. It is this period of the 
decay of Latin and the growth of the Romance dialects, 
that alone gives an opportunity of gaining an insight into 
the regenerative process of a language; teaching us by 
analogy what process it was that in times beyond the reach 
of history broke up the common Arian type into various 
dialects, such as Greek, Latin, Sanskrit, Gothic, Celtic 
and Slavonic. We regret that we can afford only so brief 
an allusion to this interesting subject. 

Waiiachian. It Avill be necessary to give some detail on the Wal- 

lachian — a language known to few before the beginning 
of the war, but latety brought into notoriety by the fate 
of the unfortunate Wallachians, who have had to bear the 
first shock of the war, between their protectors on either side. 

The people whom we call Wallachians, call them- 
selves Romani, and their language Romania. 

This Romance language is spoken in Wallachia and 
Moldavia, and in parts of Hungary, Transylvania, and 
Bessarabia; while on the right bank of the Danube it oc- 
cupies some parts of the old Thracia, Macedonia, and 
even Thessaly. 

It is divided by the Danube into two branches; the 
Northern or Daco-romanic, and the Southern or 
Macedo-romanic. The former is less mixed, and has 
received a certain literary culture; the latter has borrowed 
a larger number of Albanian and Greek words, and has 
never been fixed grammatically. 

The modern Waiiachian is the daughter of the lan- 
guage spoken in the Roman province of Dacia, 



39 



The original inhabitants of Dacia were called Thra- 
cians, and their language Illyrian. We have hardly any 
lemains of the ancient Illyrian dialect, and are unable to 
form an opinion as to its relationship with Greek or any 
other family of speech. 

The frontiers of Dacia (according to Ptolemy) were 
the Theiss, the Upper Dniester, the Pruth, and the Danube; 
so that it then comprised part of Gallicia, the Bukovina, 
Moldavia, Wallachia, Transylvania, the Banat, and about 
one third of Hungary. It hence appears that the Wallachian, 
as spoken at the present day, has gained ground on the 
east, where it now stretches into Bessarabia as far as the 
.Dniester; but lost it on the west, partly by the Hungarians, 
who occupy the country on the left side of the Theiss, 
partly by the Slaves, not to mention considerable Hun- 
garian and German settlements in the interior of Walla- 
chia. Of the 2,056,000 inhabitants of Wallachia, 900,000 
are Wallachians, 700,000 Hungarians, 250,000 Germans, 
about 100,000 Slaves, the rest Greeks, Armenians, Jews, 
and Gipsies. 

219 B.C., the Romans conquered Illyria; 30 b.c. they 
took Moesia; and 107 a.d. , the Emperor Trajan made 
Dacia a Roman province. At that time the Thracian po- 
pulation had been displaced by the advance of Sarmatian 
tribes, particularly the Yazyges. Roman colonists intro- 
duced the Latin language; and Dacia w^as maintained as 
a colony to 272, when the Emperor Aurelian had to cede 
it to the Goths. Part of the Roman inhabitants then 
emigrated and settled south of the Danube. 

In the year 489, Slavonic tribes began their advance 
into Moesia and Thracia. They were settled in Moesia by 
678, and eighty years later a province was founded in 
Macedonia, under the name of Slavinia. 

At present the Wallachian language is surrounded on Nortiiem 
all sides by Slavonic dialects, except in the West, where 
it borders on the Hungarian. According to Safarik the 
Wallachian begins in the south near Golubatch, and fol- 
lows the Danube downwards to its conflux with the Pruth. 
It then ascends with the Pruth, and after reaching the 



40 



Wallachian Faltchi, takes a north-eastern direction, crosssing 
the rivers Jalpuch and Kogalnik, in the neighbourhood of 
which several German colonies are found. Afterwards the 
frontier line of the Wallachian language recedes once more 
southward and westward, crosses the Kogalnik again, and 
meets the Bulgarian near the Jalpuch. Thence the frontier 
proceeds in a straight line towards Kilia, follows the nor- 
thern branch of the Danube, 'Ismail remaining excluded, 
and reaches the Black Sea, following the southern arm 
of the Danube, but separated by it from the Tataric dia- 
lects, spoken in that part of the Dobrudsha. The Black 
Sea now forms its frontier as far as the mouth of the 
Dniester, Akerman being Wallachian, while Ovidiopol on, 
the opposite side is Slavonic. Here also several German 
colonies are found, as Manheim, Freudenthal, Lustdorf, 
and Liebenthal. The Dniester may afterwards be taken 
as the frontier of the Wallachian, although it is spoken 
in some places on its left bank, such as Malajest, Du- 
bosari, and Kamenka, while Tiraspol has a Slavonic 
population. Between Kamenka and Jampol, the fron- 
tier leaves the Dniester, turns north-west, enters Gal- 
licia near Tchernowitz, and reaches the Theiss near Hussth 
in Hungary: hence directly south to Golubatch on the 
Danube. The chief places which it touches here, are 
Hussth (Hungarian) , Halmi (Slavonic) , Szathmar (Hun- 
garian), Maiteny and Beltek (German), Bihar and Gross- 
Wardein (Hungarian), Lippa, Greifenthal, Briickenau (Ger- 
man), Arad and Temesvar (Wallachian), Denta (Slavonic), 
Weisskirchen and New Moldava (German). It is not al- 
ways easy to determine which language is spoken in each 
of these places, particularly as it seems to be the policy 
of the Greek church to supplant, so far as lies in its 
power, the non- Slavonic dialects. In some Wallachian 
villages, as Murgu says, the presence of a few Servians 
is a sufficient pretext for using the Slavonic language in 
Wallachian churches. "Nay, I know several Wallachian 
villages," he writes in 1830, "where the Slavonic language 
is used in church, though not a single Raitz (i.e., Servian,) 
lives there; for instance in the Wallachian frontier-district, 



No. 1 3, at Bosovics, Lapusnic, Budaria, and Banya. In 
other places, where a few Turkish Servians have settled, 
the Wallachian language has at once been banished, not 
only from the church, but from the schools. In the vil- 
lage of Old Moldova, two -thirds of the inhabitants are 
Wallachian, and but few Raitz, yet service is performed 
in Slovenian. In Wallacho-Pozseszena, where the inha- 
bitants are Wallachian, there is no national school, and 
the people are compelled to pay for the Raitz school- 
master at Raitz -Pozseszena." 

Within the limits of the Wallachian, as described above, 
there are large districts in which different languages are 
spoken. In Transylvania there are three settlements, com- 
monly called "the Sachsenland" (Saxon - country). The 
language spoken there is Low German. It is divided into 
three districts: 1, Sachsenland Proper, with the towns of 
Hermanstadt, Broos, and Schasburg; 2, Burzenland, with 
its capital Kronstadt; 3, Nosnerland, with Bistritz for its 
capital. High German is spoken in Lugos, Krasova, and 
Oravitza. Again there is a large tract of country where 
the language is Hungarian. This comprises the towns of 
Neumark or Maros, Vasarhely, Karlsburg, and Klausen- 
burg. Besides this, small Hungarian settlements are scat- 
tered near Bucharest and Jassy. Hungarian is spoken in 
the town of Radautz in Gallicia, and as far as Seret, in 
Kapnik, Gross -Banya (half- German); in Tasnad on the 
Krasna, in Krasna and Zilah on the same river, in Mar- 
gitta (half-Slavonic) ; in Elesd, Ujlak, and Koros Banya, 
in Shoborshin, Deva on the Maros, and in Hatzeg in the 
south-west of Transylvania. 

This northern or Daco -Romanic branch of the Wal- 
lachian is again divided into dialects, the one spoken in 
Wallachia, the other in Moldavia. Moldavia is called Kara- 
Iflak (Black or Little Wallachia) by the Turks, and the 
Moldavians sometimes go by the name of Kara-Wal- 
lachians. 



When in 272 the Emperor Aurelian ceded Dacia to Souiiiern 

Wallachians. 

the Goths, large numbers of the Roman colonists crossed 



3lnssarcts or 
Dassarets. 



Great Wal- 
lachians. 



42 



the Danube, and settled in Moesia and in the Haemus- 
mountains. These new colonies were named "Dacia Aure- 
liana." These southern Wallachian are now called Makedo- 
Wallachians or Kutzo Wallachians (Lame Wallachiaus), or 
by another nickname "Zinzars," because the}^ pronounce 
five "tzintz" instead of "chinch." They are also known 
as Moeso-Dacians (MoiaioSaxs^). 

But although in former times Wallachian was spoken 
in the country between the Danube and the Haemus — 
i.e., within the limits of Thracia — Bulgarian alone is found 
there at present, and, except in the valleys of the Hae- 
mus, no traces seem to have remained of the old Wal- 
lachian idiom. The pressure of the Turks drove the Wal- 
lachians further South and Westward; and it is in Al- 
bania, Macedonia, and Thessaly that we now meet with 
clusters of Wallachian colonists. Our information, howe- 
ver, is not exact as to their number, and while some give 
half of the inhabitants of Thracia, and two-thirds of the 
inhabitants of Macedonia as Wallachian, Pouqueville sta- 
tes the total number of Wallachians in those parts of 
Greece at 74,470. A census is difficult, because of the 
migratory habits of the people, part travelling with mer- 
chandise, part with their flocks, throughout the country. 

Pouqueville divides the southern Wallachians into three 
classes. The northernmost live in the mountains which 
separate Macedonia from Albania, principally however on 
the Macedonian side. They are called Massarets or Das- 
sarets, but claim themselves the name of Romounis. They 
inhabit San Marina, Avdela, Perivoli, Voschopolis and 
Vlacho-Kleisura, and their number is given as 18,500. 

The second class live in the Pindus-mountains which 
separate Thessaly from Albania, and the country there 
is called Great or Upper Wallachia (MsyocAT] BXa^t^a, 
or "AvG) Blcc/iaC), as opposed to Little Wallachia, a name 
given sometimes to the ancient Aetolia and Akarnania. 
Their chief seats are East and South-east of Janina, the 
towns and villages of Mezzovo, Malakassi, Lesinitza, Ka- 
larites, Kalaki, Klinovo, Zagori. Many of them under- 
stand and speak Greek, but the women speak Wallachian 



43 



only. Their number is given by Pouqueville as 45,000. 
They call themselves Armeng, and not Rum. 

The third class are the so-called Bovians or Bomaei, Bovians. 
who live near the sources of the Evenus or Feidaris, and 
the Kephissos, near Zeitun. They are mixed with Alba- 
nians and Greeks. Their chief places are Nea-Patra, 
Karpenitza, Zeitun and Cossina, but they travel with 
their flocks into Aetolia, the villages of Amphissa, and 
Boeotia. 

The grammar of Wallachian is very easy, and any vvaiiachiai 
one acquainted with Italian and French could master 
it in a fortnight. As in the other Romance languages, 
the Latin terminations of the cases are lost and preposi- 
tions used instead. It will be seen, however, that the 
Wallachian, by preserving one oblique case of the article, 
was able to dispense with prepositions in cases where 
the other Romance languages have to employ them. We 
may render in Wallachian, I have sold the garden to 
my neighbour, by "Jo am vendut vecinului mieu gradina." 
In French we should have to employ a preposition, and 
say, a mon voisin, while in Wallachian the oblique case 
of the article (being always put after the substantive , as 
in Danish , and not before , as in English) , suffices by 
its form lui to indicate the dative of the noun to which 
it is attached. If there should be an ambiguity, we may 
employ a preposition, but in this case the article is no 
longer in an oblique case, but in the nominative; for 
instance, «To am vendut la vecinul mieu gradina, I have 
sold the garden to (la) my neighbour. 

Another peculiarity which Wallachian shares in com- 
mon with the other Romance languages as compared 
with Latin , is the use of the articles ; though here 
again Wallachian differs from her sisters by placing the 
article (ille) after and not before the noum In Latin it 
was optional to say homo ille or ille homo; and while 
Italian, and the other Romance dialects, fixed upon the 
latter, the Wallachian preferred the former. It is likely 
that Albanian and Bulgarian, both near neighbours of 
Wallachian, have adopted this mode of expressing the 



4 4 

article from Wallachian. We have no authority for ascribing 
this grammatical peculiarity to the ancient Illyrian language, 
but we know that Wallachian, as a modern Latin dialect, 
was at liberty, as noticed before, to say either ille homo, 
"the man," or homo ille, "man the." 

Like the other Romance dialects the Wallachian has 
lost the neuter; and in the conjugation, auxiliary verbs 
have been used to replace several of the ancient Latin 
tenses, such as the perfect, the future, and the whole of 
the passive. The construction of sentences has been sim- 
plified, and inverted phrases are used with great caution. 
The pronunciation has been softened, and many derivative 
words have been added to the stores of the Latin vocabulary. 
Hence the most difficult part of Wallachian is the 
dictionary, which, though originally derived from Latin, 
is now so full of Slavonic terms that the labour of ac- 
quiring a full knowledge of Wallachian is considerably 
greater than with Italian or Spanish. Another difficulty 
arises from the scantiness of books to assist foreigners 
desirous to study this dialect. There is indeed a very 
meritorious grammar by Alexi, but it is written in Latin, 
and rather cumbersome. Another grammar by Blasewics 
is written in German, but the use of the Cyrillic alpha- 
bet to express Wallachian makes it still more inconvenient 
for English students and travellers. A Wallachian dictionary 
published at Ofen is rather unwieldy; and there is hardly 
anything deserving of the name of literature. The only 
thing to be done is to learn the grammar, and then en- 
deavour to pick up the most necessary phrases by ear. 
There are some vocabularies which may be used with ad- 
vantage. Italian words will frequently be understood, 
although Slavonic synonymes may be more usual. Ac- 
cording to a computation by Diez, the letter B in the 
Ofen dictionary contains only 42 Latin words; the rest, 
about 105, are foreign, Servian, Russian, Albanian, Hun- 
garian, and German. 
Wallachian The alphabet which was used at first in reducing 

Alphabet ^ . 

Wallachian to writing was the Cyrillic. I he Walla- 
chians took it from the Servians, and after adding some 



45 



more signs, raised the number of their letters to /|4. 
This alphabet was used in printing, in the year 1580. In 
1 677 the first attempt was made to write Wallachian 
with Roman letters; and after many experiments to settle 
a uniform alphabet, not less than 13 different systems 
of orthography are now employed among the Wal- 
la chians. 

The most rational system is that used by Alexi, 
in his Grammatica Daco-Romana. It is principally foun- 
ded on etymological considerations, and retains as far as 
possible the Latin spelling. Where the pronunciation has 
changed; where, for instance, an original c is pronoun- 
ced as ch, a d as z, at as ts, accents and hooks are 
used to indicate this alteration in order not to sacrifice 
etymology. The greatest inconvenience is the introduc- 
tion of these new types — an inconvenience which can 
easily be removed, however, by adopting the "Missionary 
Alphabet." This would preserve the etymology, without 
the difficulty of accented letters. 



Alcxi' 


s 


Alphabet. 


1 


A 


a 


^ 


A 


> 
a 


3 


B 


b 


4 


C 


c 


5 


P 


9 


6 


D 


d 


7 
8 


D 
E 


d 

L 

e 


9 


E 


5 

e 


10 


E 


e 


11 


E 


e 


12 


F 


f 


13 


G 


g 


14 


H 


h 


15 


I 


i 



Pronunciation. 

a in far 

a in America 

b in bed 

c in car 

ch in church 

ts in benefits 

d in down 

z in zeal 

a in date 

e in mother 

ea in yearn (?) 

e in scene 

f m find 

g in go 

j in join 

ch in loch 

i in ravine 



Missionary 
Alpliabet. 



or a 
b 
k 
k 

I 

d 
z 
e 

or e 
ea 
i 
f 
g 
9 



46 



Alexi's 


A 


phabet. 


16 i 1 


17 


i 


18 


Jj 


19 


L 1 


20 


M m 


21 


N n 


22 


o 


23 


6 6 


24 


6 6 


25 


p p 


26 


Qu qi 


27 


R r 


28 


S s 


29 


S s 


30 


T t 


31 


T t 


32 


U u 


33 


Uu 


34 


V V 



Pronuncialion. 

i hi bird 
y in yea 
s in pleasure 
1 in low 
m in mind 
n ill no 
o in no 
o in work 
a in fall 
p in pay 
iC in car 
ch m church 
r in run 
s m sin 
sh in she 
t 171 town 
ts m benefits 
u in full 
00 m fool 
V in veil 



Missionary 
Alphabet. 

or i 



1 

m 

n 

o 

or 6 

ou 

P 
k 

k 
r 

s 
s 
t 

I 

u 
u 

V 



The Cyrillic 
Alphabet. 



Although the Roman alphabet is decidedly superior 
to any other for writing languages derived from Latin, 
yet the influence of the Slavonic tribes, by whom the 
Wallachians are surrounded , has been so great as to 
induce the Wallachians to prefer the Cyrillic alphabet. 
It will be necessary, therefore, to give a short account 
of this, and to show, by means of a comparative table, 
how the sounds of Wallachian may be and have been 
rendered in this foreign alphabet. Besides, in order to 
understand the system of any Slavonic alphabet now in 
use, it is necessary to have a clear idea of the Cyrillic, 
because they all depend on, or are at least influenced 
by it. 

This alphabet was invented by Cyrillus, a Greek 
monk, who , together with Methodius , was sent from 
Constantinople to preach the Gospel to the Slaves, in 862. 



It is chiefly taken from the Greek, but some signs are 
added to represent sounds peculiar to the Slavonic dia- 
lects, and foreign to Greek. New signs not taken from 
Greek are — 

H?. for the sound of s in pleasure, or j in French jamais. 
Ill „ „ sh in she.] 

I^ „ „ sht, abbreviation of III -j- T. 

U „ ,, ts in benefits. 

H ,, „ ch in church. 

li ,, ,, in work. 

h ,, ,5 1 in bird. 

ifi. ,, „ on in the French balcon. 

"B „ „ ea in yea. 

Others are modifications of Greek letters, as — 

B for b, to distinguish it from B, which represented 

the sound of v. 
A to express the nasal sound of in, as in the French 
enfin. 
What produced, however, the greatest inconvenience 
in this new alphabet was the introduction of a whole 
class of vowels with the inherent initial y. These 
are — 

1^ for the sound of ya in Yarmouth. 
ID „ „ yu in yule. 

I€ .^ .^ yea. 

1^ „ ,, ien in French bien. 

1^ ,, ,, ion in French nation. 

These compound letters were invented because the 
Greek alphabet offered no consonant for the simple sound 
of y. It would have been far better, however, to have 
added one simple new sign instead of introducing a num- 
ber of compound vowels. As it is, not every vowel has 
received its own type to represent it when preceded by y. 
The sound of yi (yee) has no sign of its own, and the 
simple H must stand for both i and yi, even in Old- 
Slavonic. To the "B (e) also the double power of e and 
ye (ay and yea) was assigned. Still greater confusion 
arose where, as in Russian, the pronounciation of these 
liquid, or as they are called pre-iotized, vowels, chan- 



& 



48 



ed in the course of time, and became simple again, 
while the original orthography remained, so that H in 
Russian is now pronounced not only as ya (in yard), 
but also like a simple e (in bed). Besides the H, the 
E, li, and H also vary in Russian between the sounds 
ye, ye, yi and e, e, i (the vowels pronounced as in 
Italian). 

The letters 1» and h were intended by Cyrillus to 
express the shortest sounds of u and i. In modern Bul- 
garian 'Is has still preserved the sound of u, and it is 
used for the same purpose in Wallachian. In Russian, 
however, these two final letters are no longer pronounced 
as vowels; yet the letters have been retained in order 
to indicate the peculiar pronunciation of the preceding, 
and now final, consonant. Where the final T) ceases to 
be pronounced, the preceding consonant, becoming final, 
takes a harsh and strong sound as though the letter was 
double, and a soft or sonant consonant becomes hard or 
mute. For instance, the masculine termination of the 
nominative singular was originally in all Arian languages 
an s, preceded by a short vowel, as, os, us. This final 
s was frequently dropped in modern languages. Thus 
bonus became in Italian bono; sunus, son, which 
still exists in Lithuanian, became sunu. Now this short 
vowel at the end would in Slavonic be written by %; 
and originally this was intended for pronunciation. But 
as we find that, for instance, in French, bonus and bono 
became bon, so in Russian also the final vowel was sup- 
pressed in speaking. Yet the sign was retained in writing 
in order to indicate that the last consonant was to be 
pronounced harshly or, in some cases, like a double 
consonant. Syn, son, therefore, with 1 at the end, was 
no longer to be sounded sunu but sunn; gladu, hunger, 
where ti is written by ''fc, is pronounced glatt. The b, 
on the contrary, was originally a short i, and as the i 
exercises in Slavonic a mollifying influence on a pre- 
ceding consonant, the letter b, where it is no longer 
pronounced as a vowel, causes the preceding, and now 
final, consonant to take a mouille or slender sound. 



(To page 49.) 



Cyrillic 
Alphabet. 






Corre- 
sponding 
letters 
of the 
Mission. 
Alphab. 



Pronuncia- 
tion in Eng- 
lish. 



Safarik'l 
tran- I 
scrip-}' 



Hungarian. 



Old. 



Wallachian. 



New. 



Alexi. 



i {\ 

2 B 
3 

4 B 
5 

6 r 

7 A 

8 



10 

11 € 

12 SR 
13 

14 S 

15 1^ 

16 H 

17 i' 

18 

19 I 

20 K 

21 A 

22 

23 M 
U 

25 N 
26 

27 
28 

29 n 

30 

31 p 
32 

33 C 
34 



20 
30 



40 
50 
70 
80 
100 
200 



b 
by 

V 

vy 



dz 



psalm 
bring 

veil 



go 
do 



e, ye 

z 
zy 

z 
z 

i 



y 

k 

1 

ly 

m 

my 

n 

ny 

o 

ou 

p 
py 



pleasure 



zeal 
zeal 
ravine 

ravine 



V v) 



A 
E 

B 

r 

D 
ft 



. . jike dy 



gy, like di 
in dieu 



zs 



yet 
kite 
let 



man 



not 



note 



pan 



run 



sun 



sy 



h J 

k 

1 



ly, like il in 
email 



n 

ny 

o 



sz 



S, like yiea, 
or e 



1, e 



c, ch, qu 
1 



m 
n 

o, 6 
P 



Physiological Deflni.ion, 


.^S. 


°fh'o°flrs.°' 
degreo. 


caXfor 
Ibe second 
degiee. 


-~~--- 


i 


i 


i 
1 


1 


i 
1 


1 


1 
5 


1 


Linguales 

46 Liquida 

47 „ fricata 


■■ 






correre, Italian 
cur 


i: 


; 


; 


; 


^ 


-\ 


•> 




r 


R 


J 


48 „ diacritica 


















49 Flatus asper 

50 „ lenis 


sh 
(zh) 

P 
ph 

b 
bh 

w 
f 



fi 




^, Sanskrit 


^ 






LT 


^ 




e? 


.... 


Lablales 

51 Tenuis 






pan 

top-heavy 

bed 

club-house 

pait, Ethiopic 

mill 

wiU 

life 

Uve 

Sanskrit 

Sanskrit 

(beggar, father, dirt, work, 
Ibut, blood, double &c. 
dirt, whirl'd 

work, world 

Sam 

psalm 

knit 

neat 

friendly 




V 


V 


V 


XT 


Si 

3 
3 






52 „ aspirata 






u 








54 „ aspirata 

55 Tenuissima 








P 








^ 

^ 


r 

o 


r 


r 

} 

o 




1 






57 Liquida 

58 Flatus asper 

59 „ lenis 






m 














60 Anusvara 

61 Visarga 


h 




























Vowels. 
1 Neutralis 




2 Laryngo-palatalis 






































4 Gutturalis brevis 

5 „ longa 






t 


<5^ 




1 

1 

4 




- 


:> 




(a) 






7 „ longa 

8 DentaUs brevis 


(0 




9 „ longa 

I Lingualis brevis 

II „ longa 
12 Labialis brevis 


n 

e (ai) 

ai 
ei (ei) 
oi (6u) 

6 (au) 

eu (eu) 
ou (ou) 








f 
w 

^ 

^ 
^ 




















fiery 


/ 








1 
















full 
fool 
debt 
date 
aisle 
Eis, German 

not 

note 

proud 

Freude, German 

bought, aU 

Vater, German 


em. 


13 „ longa 

14 Gutturo - palatalis brevis 

15 „ longa 

16 Diphthongus gutturo -palatalis 

17 „ laryngo-palatalis 

18 „ laryngo-palatalis 

19 Gutturo -labialis brevis 

20 „ longa 

21 Diphthongus gutturo -labialis 

22 „ laryngo -labialis 


.... 




(0) 

(ai) 




^ 
$ 


is- 






TJ 


— 






































V 




9 


(au) 




# 
# 


r^ 




5' 
































25 Palatalis fracta 


























Giite, German; une, French 
Konig, German; peur, French 


















27 Gutturo -labialis fracta 











































an or Servian. 


Polish. 


Bohemian. 


Hungarian. 


Wallachian. 




Gaj a Berlic. 


Old. 


New. Alexi. 




tj,or c(like ci 

in Italian) 
li 


t 
U 


t 

t' 


t 

ty like ti in 

metier 
u 

f 

h 


T 


T 


t 




Oy 

0) 

X 


Y 

0) 
X 


u 


not 


f (hv) 

h 


f 

ch 

h 


f 

ch 

h 


f 
h 


:d) 


GD 


• • 


















c 

c, like tch 
c, or tj, like 
Ital. c in cio 

s 


c 
cz 

c 

sz 


c 
c 


cz 

cs 


ft 
H 


^ 
4 


h 9 

ci, qui 




ss, s 


s 


m 


lU 


St 












? 3 5 ) 7 

a, e, 1, 0, u 


















y like ii or e 


y 


...... 






...... 








je (e, ie) 

e (e, e a), as e 

in end, or e in 

father 


e, like yeast 
e 


e, like ie in 
niego 

e 


...... 


"B ea 




ia, e 






10 




iu 












ia 


• • 

















Q 
^ 






^ (i'a) ya 
& (a, ui), yu 








































....... 


X 


X 


...... 


1 
t 

-0^, ft 

V, i or V 

^ like ling 

1'. . . . . . 


i 






























































1 







49 



Thus the old form esmi, which is still used in Sanskrit 
and Lithuanian, became in Russian yes mi, where the final 
is written by b, but no longer felt as a vowel, except 
so far as it imparts an expiring vibration to the prece- 
ding consonant m. 

The Russians used the Cyrillic alphabet to the time 
of Peter the Great. This great reformer struck off nine 
letters of the ancient alphabet as useless, gave the rest 
a more rounded form, had his new types cast in Hol- 
land, and printed the first Russian periodical with them 
at Moscow in 1704. 

It has been the policy of Russia to support the in- 
troduction of her alphabet among the nations which in 
the course of time she expects to absorb. Still it is a 
curious fact that the whole Western branch of the Sla- 
vonic family, and* some even of the Eastern Slaves (Bul- 
garians and Illyrians) have preferred the Roman or Ger- 
man alphabet, and have introduced it even where the 
Cyrillic letters had formerly been used. 

While Latin, in its ancient history standing almost Modern 
alone as the language of Italy, bursts out in this vast 
growth of dialects, Wallachian and Italian, Provencal and 
French, Spanish and Portuguese, the Hellenic languages, 
on the contrary, so rich in dialectic formations in an- 
cient times, have come down to us only in one narrow 
stream, as the modern Greek. In Provencal, French, 
Italian, Wallachian, Spanish, and Portuguese we have as 
it were the diaries of several travellers, who all set out 
on the same journey, but, according to their individual 
tastes and characters, received different impressions, and 
noted down the various events in their passage from 
place to place in a different style and spirit. But in 
attempting to account for the new grammatical forms 
of the Greek language, we look in vain for that kind 
of collateral evidence which the six parallel dialects 
of the language of Rome offer in such abundance; so 
that if we cannot explain the new modes of expression 
by reference to the old common stock (tj Kolviq), we 
are left without further help. Happily, the changes which . 

4 



50 

the language of Athens suifered in its transition from the 
ancient to the modern Greek, are less considerable by far 
than those experienced by the Latin during the vicissitu- 
des of its historical and national development. Most of 
the new grammatical forms can still be recognised by a 
classical scholar. The declension of the ancient grammar 
has been almost entirely preserved. The conjugation, 
also, hardly contains any new elements. Some forms 
have gone out of use, as, for instance, the Dative in the 
declensions, the Dual in declension and conjugation, the 
Optative, and also to a great extent the old Infinitive. 
There are also some few periphrastic tenses which have 
found their way into the modern Greek; but they are by 
no means so perplexing as similar forms in the Romance 
dialects. Any one acquainted with the character of se- 
condary formations in language, will understand at once 
the process by which compound tenses, such as '^sXw 
Ypavpoi, I shall write, -vj^sXa y^d^ei I should write, £)^« 
Ypav[>£!, I have written, si^a ypavpSL, I had written, have 
been formed. ©sXco in ancient Greek means I will, and 
though it is incorrect to say I will, instead of I shall, 
write, yet a foreigner is understood if he uses will, in- 
stead of shall. As to £)(^(o, I have, and ziy^a, I had, these 
are the same auxiliaries which we find in our own and 
in most modern languages. 

Albanian. The Albanian language, spoken within the limits 

of the ancient lUyricum in the north, and of Epirus in 
the South, offers one of the most difficult problems with 
regard to its origin and its relationship with other lan- 
guages. 

Xylander gives an account of the various opinions 
that have been proposed on this point, and their con- 
tradictory character will at least show the difficulty of 
the problem that has still to be solved. 

Leibnitz supposed that the Albanians were of Celtic 
origin, and that their language was connected with that 
of Germany and Gaul. 

Thunmann after remarking that the Albanians had been 



51 



derived by others from the Caucasus, from the Caspian Sea, 
and from Calabria; that they had been taken for Slaves, 
whether Chorwatians, Serbians, or Bulgarians, or for des- 
cendants of the ancient Illyrians and Macedonians, expresses 
his belief that the Albanians are the remnants of the an- 
cient Illyrians, so long the neighbours of the Greeks, and 
the subjects of Rome. In the same manner he recognises 
in the Wallachians the descendants of the Thracians and 
Macedonians, and he ventures an opinion that these two 
languages, the Albanian and Wallachian, are mutually 
related. 

Herder takes a similar view in declaring both the 
Albanians and Wallachians the remnants of one of the 
chief nations of ancient Europe. 

The Illyrian origin of the Albanians is likewise sup- 
ported by Ange Masci in his Essay "Sur Torigine de la 
nation albanaise", in Malte-Brun's Annales des Voyages. 
Malte-Brun himself remarks that Greek and Teutonic ele- 
ments preponderate in Albanian, and that the traces of 
a Slavonic influence are small. He states it as his opinion 
that Albanian cannot be derived from any other known 
language, and that it must be considered as an indepen- 
dent idiom, the origin of which goes back to that ante- 
historical period in which the Greek, the Celtic, the Sla- 
vonic, and Teutonic branched off as independent national 
languages. 

Adelung on the contrary imagines that, after separa- 
ting the German, Slavonic, Roman, Greek, and Turkish 
ingredients, the remaining portion of Albanian is Tataric, 
and he derives the Albanians either from the Bulgarians, 
an originally Tataric race, or from a tribe, settled East 
of the Black-Sea, between the Caucasus and the river 
Cyrus, a tribe that had been identified with the Alanes 
of Southern Russia (see page 35), particularly because 
these Alanes had made inroads into Bulgaria and Thracia 
as late as 1308. In other places, however, he hints at 
a Thracian or Illyrian origin for the Albanians. Pouque- 
ville admits the immigration of the Albanians from the 
country East of the Black Sea. 






Vater again seems inclined to take Albanian as the 
modern form of a language as ancient as Latin, and con- 
nected with it by community of origin. 

The following remarks are taken from Leake's Resear- 
ches in Greece, London 1814. 

"The Albanian", he says in his preface, "must be consi- 
dered as holding a distinct character in the midst of the 
languages by which it is surrounded, being in all proba- 
bility the ancient Illyric, with some alterations of the 
same kind as Latin and Greek have undergone from the 
Teutonic and Slavonian conquerors of Southern Europe." 

In his Chapter on the Albanian Language, he writes, 
"Through the whole course of Grecian History, from 
its earliest records to the fall of the Constantinopolitan 
Empire, we find a people, distinct from the Greeks in 
race and language, inhabiting the North- Western side of 
the country, and extending along the ridges which border 
the sea-coast, or run parallel to it. They appear to have 
reached as far South as the Bay of Ambracia, for Scylax 
deems this gulf the northern boundary of Greece upon the 
West-side, and Thucydides calls the Amphilochi, who in- 
habited the hills at the head of it, barbarians; by this 
word implying that they spoke a language different from 
the Greek. The same historian also applies the word 
Barbarians to the people on the coast of Epirus, oppo- 
site to the island of Sybota, and Strabo informs us, that 
the Epirotic tribes were mixed with the Illyrian , and 
spoke two languages: meaning either that, like the greater 
part of the present Albanians, they used both the Greek 
and their own vernacular language, or that the Epirotic 
was distinct from the Illyrian tongue, and perhaps an- 
other dialect of the language, which was spoken through- 
out Macedonia and the neighbouring countries, before the 
letters and civilization of Greece had spread over these 
provinces. It would appear, that in Epirus, ^nd that 
part of Illyricum, afterwards called New-Epirus, this 
change never took effect to so great a degree as it did 
in Thessaly and Macedonia; and that the lofty moun- 
tains and extreme ruggedness of this part of the country, 



53 



have in all ages afforded to the remains of the Aborigi- 
nes a security against intruders. This supposition is in 
a great measure confirmed by those remnants of a dis- 
tinct language, which forms the basis of the modern Al- 
banian dialect: and it is observable, that all the words, 
which resemble those of the same import in other mo- 
dern languages, may be accounted for by the revolutions 
which brought so many foreign nations into Albania, or 
its vicinity; and that these extraneous words will be found 
to exist in the same proportion as the impression made 
upon the country by the several races of foreigners." 

"Of the Greek words which occur in Albanian, a few 
have internal marks of having been adopted before the 
corruption of the language; a larger proportion afford the 
same evidence of having been taken from the Romaic 
Greek; and there are many also, whose forms, being the 
same both in the ancient and modern Greek dialect, are 
of uncertain date." 

"Latin words are two or three times as numerous as 
Greek, but still much below the proportion in which they 
are found in the other modern languages of Europe. 
This may partly be accounted for by the secluded posi- 
tion and warlike habits of the mountaineers of Albania, 
which, defending them from being ever completely sub- 
jugated by the Romans, preserved their language like that 
of the Pyrinean and Cantabrian mountains, from ever 
receiving so large an admixture of Latin; and partly by 
the study of the Latin language, which has prevailed to 
so great an extent in civilized Europe since the revival 
of letters." 

"The few words of Gothic origin, which exist in Al- 
banian, must have come into use in the fifth century, 
when the Goths of Alaric became complete masters of 
the greater part of the two Epirus provinces, especially the 
Northern, where we afterwards find some of their descen- 
dants settled in quiet possession of a part of the country. 
One of these , named Sidismund , was in alliance with 
Theodoric the Great, when in his compaign against the 
Romans of the Eastern Empire , he entered Macedonia, 



54 



and they procured for him, by stratagem, the city of 
Dyrrhachium. It also appears that the Goths were in 
great force in Dahnatia at the time when the Emperor 
Justinian the First made war upon them, and reannexed 
that province to the empire." 

"About the same period, another tribe of strangers, who 
proved to be the most numerous, and the most formi- 
dable of any to the Greek emperors, began to make their 
appearance in the same part of the country. The Scla- 
vonians, chiefly under the name of Bulgarians, continued 
their irruptions into the European provinces of the Em- 
pire during the seventh, eighth, and ninth centuries; and 
about the year 870, Achris, the ancient Lychnidus, was 
the residence of a King of Bulgaria, and the see of an 
Archbishop, whose spiritual authority extended to Kanina 
and lerikho, the ancient Orichus. In the tenth century 
the same race was settled at Nicopolis, the chief place 
of a Theme, which comprehended all old Epirus; and it 
appears, that about this time all the more accessible 
parts of Epirus, were occupied by strangers of Sclavonian 
origin. Until the last periods of the Greek empire, the 
Kings of Bulgaria and Servia continued to make occasio- 
nal conquests and settlements in Greece, and even in the 
Morea: and they have, to this day, left traces of their 
long residence, by the numerous names of places of Scla- 
vonian derivation to be found in every part of the country. 
It was in these ages of Bulgarian prowess, that the re- 
mains of the Illyrian and Epirotic nations became finally 
included within the boundaries, which they have ever 
since held. Many Sclavonian words then found their 
way into the Albanian language, and have been increased 
in number by the intercourse between Albania and the 
extensive regions of Servia and Bulgaria, which surround 
it on the North and East, and throughout which the Bul- 
garian dialect of Sclavonic is spoken. It may be thought 
surprising, perhaps, that under these circumstances, the 
proportion of the Sclavonian words is not larger, and it 
may be considered as a proof, that the strength of the 
Epirotic and Illyrian mountains, and the spirit of their 



55 



inhabitants, were still equal, as in the time of the Ro- 
mans, to protect them from being completely subdued." 

"In 1079 the army of Nicephorus Basilaees , who was 
defeated by Alexius Comnenus, consisted of Franks, Bul- 
garians, Greeks C^Pwfxatoc) and Albanians ('Ap^avlTai), 
all distinguished by their languages." 

"The Franks had been invited from Italy by tlie Bis- 
hop of Deabolis. These were the first swarm of those Nor- 
mans, who soon afterwards gave so much trouble to the 
Greek emperors. About the year H85 the Norman Kings 
of Sicily occupied with their troops Thessaly, and a great 
part of Macedonia, and these monarchs obtained perma- 
nent possessions on the Western coast of Greece. In 
these operations, as well as throughout the whole course 
of the crusades, during i 50 years, the coast of the pre- 
sent Albania was the frequent resort of the Franks, and 
Durazzo was very often their depot and place of retreat 
and safety. It is not surprising, therefore, that many 
words of French origin should have become indigenous 
in the Albanian language." 

"The words derived from Italian, Turkish and the 
Romaic, will be sufficiently accounted for by the vicinity 
and the intercourse betw^een the Albanians and these 
nations." 

Arndt in his work on "the Origin of the European 
Languages", gives it as his opinion that Albanian might 
properly be considered as the aboriginal language of the 
country, because there is no evidence of an earlier lan- 
guage, except perhaps the Iberian. If Iberian was spoken 
there at a very early period, he thinks we might account 
for the similarity of many Albanian words with the Bask 
language. Again he finds coincidences between Albanian 
and Celtic, and he accounts for Greek, Roman, Slavonian 
and German admixtures either by later contact or by a 
community of origin between the Celtic and Indo-european 
languages. 

Xylander himself begins by pointing out coincidences 
between Albanian words and Greek, ancient and modern, 
Latin, ancient and modern, German, Swedish, Danish, 



56 

English, the Slavonic dialects, Turkish, Bask, Celtic, 
Wallachian and Bulgarian, and Sanskrit. He states that 
Slavonic words form Yg^^ the Turkish y^g, the Greek Ys? 
the Teutonic y^, the Latin y., of the Albanian dictionary 
which he was able to analyse. This would make more 
than one half of the Albanian dictionary of foreign origin, 
and there would still be subtracted other words which 
Arndt considers to be Celtic, Bask, and Tchudic. By 
an examination of the grammatical forms of Albanian, 
Xylander arrives at the following conclusions, 

1) that the Albanian is not a mere jargon compounded 
of elements derived from the Romance languages; 

2) that the Albanian is not a branch of the Tataric or 
Turanian family; 

3) that the Albanian language does not contain a resi- 
duum of words of unknown origin, but that the greater 
portion of its words is Indo-Grermanic or Arian. 

He, therefore, inclines to a belief, first expressed by 
Thunmann, that the modern Albanian is the represen- 
tative of the ancient Illyrian (or Thracian) language, and 
he places the Illyrian in the same category as Greek, 
Latin, Slavonic, and Celtic, as an independent branch of 
the great Indo-European family. 
Territorial The Albanians call themselves Skipetars (from axiTTs 

Albanian mountain), while the Turks know them by the name of 
Greek. Arnauts, which is a corruption of Arbanites instead of 
Albanites. The province of Albania is surrounded on 
the North by Montenegro, Bosnia, and Servia; on the 
East by Macedonia and Thessaly; on the South by the 
Kingdom of Greece; on the West by the Ionic and 
Adriatic Seas. The limits of these dialects, the Modern 
Greek, the Albanian, the Turkish, Bulgarian and Wal- 
lachian, may be stated here according to S'afarik and 
Griesebach, though subject to correction, from further 
researches. 

West of Saloniki the Greek language is no longer 
heard; and Bulgarians inhabit the country thence to the 
frontier mountains of Albania. Greek is spoken very 



57 



nearly in the same regions where it lived in ancient 
times, in the peninsula of Epirus and Macedonia, and in 
the Archipelago, whether on European or Asiatic soil. 
South of Janina, Greek is spoken in Albania, and its 
northern frontier proceeds thence across the chain of 
mountains between Thessalonia and Macedonia. Pouque- 
ville heard Greek spoken along the Pindus. In Ana- 
setitza, he says, they speak Greek; near Kastoria, Bul- 
garian. From the Olympus range the frontier line of 
Greek takes in a small portion of the coast as far as 
Saloniki, then turns towards Seres, and follows the sou- 
thern branch of Rhodope till it reaches the meridian of 
Adrianople. All the country south and south-east of 
Adrianople as far as Marmora and the Straits, is Greek. 
The same line which reaches the -^gsean Sea near Sa- 
loniki, forms, with the exception of the Albanian, the 
southern frontier of the Slavonic languages, which extend 
northward towards the Danube — the Bulgarian in the 
east, the Servian in the west. 

The Albanian extends from Janina, or rather, as in 
the town itself the principal language is Greek, and this 
very pure, from Conidsha in the valley of the Upper 
Viosa to the White Drin, somewhat beyond 42°. Its 
eastern frontier is the Pindus, extending in an almost 
uninterrupted line to 4*2°. Albanian villages, however, 
are found on the eastern declivity of the Pindus, and 
particularly in the north. Albanian here oversteps its 
natural frontier and encroaches on Bulgarian ground. 
Emigration has brought some Albanian colonies to the 
coast of Calabria and Sicily, where they tied from the 
persecutions of the Turks. 

Besides the Albanian, Bulgarian, and Servian, which 
are the chief languages of Rumelia, Turkish is under- 
stood to a certain extent in almost all the towns and 
villages north of 40°; but it cannot be called the lan- 
guage of the country. Where, as in Rumelia, different 
dialects are mingled together, a necessity is felt for some 
means of communication intelligible to all. In Rumelia 
this is naturally the language of the conqueror, Turkish. 



banian. 



58 

But the knowledge which an Albanian or Bulgarian ac- 
quires of this language, seldom goes beyond the number 
of words and phrases indispensable for commercial trans- 
actions and the carrying on of a scanty social inter- 
course. Villages purely Turkish are scarce in Epirus 
and Macedonia; and in many cases the people have adop- 
ted the Mahommedan religion, but maintained their national 
speech. The great towns are generally divided into quar- 
ters, according to language and religion. In Saloniki 
there is a considerable Jewish population, and Spanish 
is spoken there as much as Turkish. In the higher ranks 
of Greek society, Italian is learnt more usually than 
French. Some Greek merchants who have connections 
at Vienna, speak German; English is hardly ever studied, 
and natives conversing in it are more scarce in Greece 
than in any other part of Europe. 
Professor The foUomng remarks on the Albanian Language 

nion on Ai- have been sent to me by Professor Pott, the celebrated 
author of the "Etymological Researches". Although the 
Albanian language occupies here perhaps more space than 
its practical or literary importance might seem to war- 
rant, yet I believe that the opinion of one of the foun- 
ders and highest authorities in Comparative Philology 
on the quaestio vexata of the origin of the Albanian , will 
be read with interest by many to whom his article on 
Dr. Hahn's work in the "Blatter fiir literarische Unterhal- 
tung" is less accessible. 

The language of the Albanians, the Arnauts, or, 
as they call themselves, the Sh kip e tars, is divided into 
two principal dialects, the Northern or Geghian, spo- 
ken in the ancient Illyria, and the Southern or Tos- 
kian, in Epirus. After the time of Skanderberg's heroic 
exploits, Albanian colonies took refuge in Southern Italy 
and Sicily, where Albanian is still spoken by their des- 
cendants. These Albanians in Italy possess even some- 
thing like a literature, as may be seen in a work 
by Vicenzo Dorsa, Su gli Albanesi , Ricerche e Pen- 
siere; and in an article by G. Stier in the "Kieler Mo- 
natsschrift", 1854. Girolamo di Rada, himself a poet, 



59 



is likely to become the M'pherson of his nation, and has 
published several poems in Albanian. The New-Testa- 
ment, published at Corfu, in 1827, is a translation in the 
Toskian dialect, while several works, printed by the Pro- 
paganda in the interest of the Roman -Catholic Alba- 
nians (see Leake, p. 268), are written in the Northern 
or Geghian idiom. The chief authority at present is 
Joh. George von Hahn, "Albanesische Studien", Vienna, 
1853, 4«. 

With regard to the Albanians the two principal ques- 
tions that can be asked, are 

1) Are they ancient aboriginal inhabitants of Europe, 
or do they belong to those numerous tribes who pene- 
trated at a later period into the Byzantine Empire? 

2) Is their language Arian (Indo-germanic) or not? 
The second question is at present generally answered 

in the affirmative, for instance by G. Stier in the "Kieler 
Monatsschrift", 1851, p. 860^ — 872, chiefly on account 
of the Numerals, the auxiliary verb, and the personal 
pronouns. The language, however, shows much that is 
foreign and strange, particularly in its dictionary, and in 
words which it cannot be suspected of having borrowed 
from other nations. Hence its right to be counted one 
of the Indo-germanic languages cannot be admitted with- 
out limitation and condition. 

With regard to the first question, no doubt can re- 
main at present, that the Albanian, together with the 
Moldavian and Wallachian, descends in a straight line 
from the ancient Illyrian. In the Wallachian language, 
the Illyrian element breaks through now and then, although 
it is smothered by the weight of the Latin language. The 
name, Illyrian, is no longer borne by these nations who 
have a right to it, while the Southern Slaves, the Kroa- 
tians, and Slavonians have assumed it with a kind of learned 
conceit, having no claim to it, by nationality or language, 
but only, perhaps, by their geographical position. 

The old Illyrian is one of the most comprehensive 
and most ancient stocks of Europe, though at present it 
exists only as a ruin. In this respect it is like the 



60 



Iberian, represented by the small remnant of the Basks, 
and the Rhaetian, probably closely allied with the Etrus- 
can. * The interest of this Illyrian stock is greatly in- 
creased because, from the most ancient times, it occupied 
the same seats as the Hellenic nations. Nay it probably 
preceded the Hellenes in its occupation of the Greek 
peninsula, and was afterwards broken by the Hellenic tribes 
pressing onward from the North , and partly displaced. If 
the famous name of Pdasgoi had really an ethnic mea- 
ning, and were not an unsubstantial and merely chronolo- 
gical designation of early Aborigines in general , the Illy- 
rians would best answer to this name. The Dacians and 
Getae (wrongly identified by J. Grimm, in his history of 
the German Language with the Goths); the Thracians, 
perhaps even the Macedonians, with their decidedly non- 
Hellenic speech; the Panonians, and even the Veneti and 
other Illyrian settlers in Italy, belonged to the Illyrian 
stock, and with all of these the Albanians must be con- 
sidered as more or less related. This gives a vast im- 
portance to this small remnant of an ancient European 
nationality. 

They were recognised as Illyrians by Thunmann and 
others; by Kopitar in his well-known article on the Al- 
banian, Wallachian and Bulgarian (Wiener Jahrbiicher, 
1829, p. 59—106); by Xylander, by Hahn, and lastly 
by myself. Little is known of the ancient Illyrian lan- 
guage; but Dioscorides, for instance (IV, 37) mentions 
(xavTSca as the Dacian name of the bramble. In Alba- 
nian bramble is {j,av£ (^igge (Hahn, p. 140) from man 
(morus), and ferra (sentis), given by Bianchi. Mande, 
mulbery-tree, a cognate word, approaches still more 
closely to the name given by Dioscorides. Again the 

* See on this subject the important work of L. Steub, "On Rhae- 
tian Ethnology", Stuttgardt, !8o'i, 8^'". The author has thrown 
considerable light on names of places in the Tyrol, Vorarlberg 
and the neighbouring Alpine countries. Besides the German and 
the strangely disfigured Romance names, he separates a third class 
of names, inexplicable in themselves, but showing a startling si- 
milarity with Etruscan forms. 



6 



uniform post -position of the article in Albanian, Wal- 
lachian, and Bulgarian is rightly pointed out by Kopitar 
as a proof of a most energetic and primitive use of the 
article in the Danubian countries. If in your work on 
the Classification of the Turanian Languages, p. o, you 
explain domnul in Wallachian as Latin dominus ille, this 
is right in itself, but we must still ask, how came the 
Wallachians, alone among all the Romance languages, to 
place the article in so peculiar a manner, and we may 
best answer this by supposing that like the Slavonic 
idiom of the Bulgarians, it followed the example of the 
lUyrian or Albanian syntax with which it came in con- 
tact. A good parallel to this is found in Jutland, where 
against the genius of the Danish language, a prepositive 
article is used, evidently through the influence of the 
German. Thus a Mand, the man, a Barn, the child, 
instead of Danish mande/^, barne^. I have summed up 
this linguistic problem elsewhere in the following manner. 

L Wallachians, Moldavians, Transylvanians, on one 
side, and Albanians on the other, form a common national 
stock, as far as their blood, not as far as their language 
is concerned, "the Old Illyrian." Whether this stock be- 
longed originally to the Indo-germanic family or not, it 
was certainly unconnected with the Greek, or any other 
Indo-germanic stock, and claims an independent origin. 

II. All these nations are neither Gothic nor Slavonic, 
nor, like the Magyars, of Finnic origin, nor Turks * (as 
for instances the Kumani were, if we may judge by a 
vocabulary, originally in the possession of Petrarca, and 
published by Klaproth in his Mem. Asiat.), nor Barba- 
rians, pushed forward by the Great Migrations of the 
fifth Century A.D., nor anything in fact, but Autochthones, 
in the same sense in which the Greek inhabitants of 

* What Mr. Latham, accordhig to the "Athenaeum", 185'i, Jan. 
p. 1 22, brings forward with regard to an identity of Dacians and 
Turks, does not hold good. Turkish tribes in those parts of Eu- 
rope are of later date, as may be seen from Klaproth's Asia 
Polyglotta. 



62 



that Eastern peninsula of Europe may be called so, al- 
though of course mixed to a greater extent. 

III. The Wallachian, as we know it, is decidedly a 
Romanic language, like Italian, and the other more We- 
stern daughters of Latin. It owes its origin chiefly to 
Roman colonies, sent into Dacia by Trajan, though there 
were earlier Roman conquests which may not have been 
without effect on the language of Dacia. The Provin- 
ciales of Gaul (Celtic by origin, or, as Holzmann endea- 
vours to prove, Germanic) and of Spain (originally Ibe- 
rian), were deprived of their ancient languages, while 
their bodies, with the exception of a small infusion of 
Roman blood remained Celtic and Iberian, haunted, as 
it were, by a Roman ghost. The WaUachians and Al- 
banians offer an exact parallel to the French together 
with the Bas Bretons, or to the Romanising Spaniard 
together with the Basks. In the French and Spanish 
Languages the ancient Celtic and Iberian words have 
melted away almost entirely, while the Bask is still Ibe- 
rian, and the Bas-Breton Celtic. The same applies to 
the romanised Wallachian side by-side with the more pri- 
mitive Albanian. Yet both the WaUachians and Alba- 
nians are in blood descendants of the ancient lUyrians. 

IV. Albanian and Wallachian contain, besides some 
few syntactic coincidences, nearly the same elements in 
their dictionaries, only in different proportions. In Al- 
banian the original Illyrian element preponderates , in 
Wallachian it is represented by a very small percentage. 
The Latin preponderates in Wallachian, but it exercised 
the same influence on the Albanian, different only in de- 
gree, but not in kind. Whether the Latin influenced the 
Albanian directly, or indirectly through the Wallachian, 
is still uncertain. Of the Turkish the Albanian contains 
much, the Wallachian little; the latter has instead a small 
ingTedient of Magyar words. Greek is found in both: 
in Wallachian, chiefly through ecclesiastical influences, in 
Albanian through commercial and political intercourse, 
and then generally Modern or Romaic. Some medieval and 
Byzantine terms will find their explanation by a refe- 



63 



reiice to Du Cange. Whether the ancient Illyrian bor- 
rowed from the ancient Greek and vice versa, is doubt- 
ful, but of great importance in settling the question of 
the origin and ethnological position of the Albanians. 
Finally the Wallachian has admitted many, the Albanian 
a few Slavonic words." 

Besides the Celtic, and the two classial languages. Teutonic 
Greek and Latin (sometimes comprised under the common ^^"^""^s^*^* 
title of Pelasgic), we have in Europe two other mighty 
branches, the Teutonic and Slavonic, both belonging to 
the Arian stem. 

The Teutonic is divided into three dialects, the 
Low-German, the High -German, and Scandi- 
navian. 

The oldest documents of the Low-German exist in Low-Ger- 
Gothic. The Gothic translation of the New Testament '"^" 
by Ulphilas belongs to the 4th century. The Saxon, 
which equally belongs to the Low-German class, is re- 
presented on the continent by the Old Saxon, formerly 
spoken in the north of Germany, the only important 
document of which is the Heljand, a poem of the 9th cen- 
tury. After the 5th century, Saxon was transplanted to 
the British Isles, and produced a literature of which the 
earliest documents are referred to the 7th century. 

Other dialects belonging to the Low -German class 
are Friesic, rapidly dying out, but once spoken on 
the Elbe and along the northern coast of Germany; 
Dutch, the language of Holland, and Flemish, now 
nearly absorbed by French in Belgium. Several Low- 
German dialects (Platt-deutsch) are still spoken in diffe- 
rent parts of Germany, but since Luther, Low-German has 
gradually ceased to be used as a literary language, and it is 
only in the lower ranks that it maintains its existence. 
Most of the sailors along the coast of the Baltic Sea 
speak Low-German, which is more intelligible to an Eng- 
lishman than the literary language of Germany. At Ham- 
burg, Liibeck, on the island of Riigen, and along the 
Pommeranian coast, at Dantzig, and as far as Konigs- 
berg, the whole class with which the English sailors are 



64 

likely to mix, speaks a language which a German edu- 
cated at Berlin or Vienna would hardly find easier to 
understand than an Englishman. 
High-Ger- The High-German class comprises the Old High- 

German from the 7th to the 11th century; the Middle 
High-German from the ISth century to Luther, and 
the New High-German, since Luther, the literary 
language of Germany. 

The Scandinavian branch is represented in ancient 
times by the Old Norse, the language of Norway, and 
(by colonization in the ninth century) of Iceland. In that 
island the old language has suffered less from alterations 
than in its original locality, and is spoken to the present 
day. On the Continent the Old Norse expanded into 
three different dialects, Norwegian, Swedish, and 
Danish, of which the first has now become a mere 
patois, leaving Danish and Swedish the two literary 
representatives of the Scandinavian tongue. 

No language has sent so many colonies throughout 
the world as Teutonic. Germans are to be met with in 
Algiers, on the coast of Guinea, and on the Cape of Good 
Hope; German colonies are settled in Australia and New 
Zealand, in Java and Sumatra, in the interior of Russia, 
in the Crimea, in the Valleys of the Caucasus, in North and 
South America. But the mightiest branch of the Teu- 
tonic stem has been the Anglo-Saxon. It has stretched 
its boughs from England across the Atlantic to over- 
shadow the new Continent of America. It is the language 
of civilisation in India, it preaches the gospel on all the 
coasts of Africa, and Australia is receiving in it her first 
laws. On all the five Continents it is the language that 
grows and conquers, the language of the future, the lan- 
guage of the world. Grimm speaks thus: — "None of the 
modern languages has through the very loss and decay 
of all phonetic laws, and through the dropping of nearly 
all inflections, acquired greater force and vigour than 
English , and from the fulness of those vague and inde- 
finite sounds, which may be learned, but can never be 
taught, it has derived a power of expression such as has 



65 

never been at the command of any human tongue. Begotten 
by a surprising union of the two noblest languages of 
Europe, the one Teutonic, the other Romanic, it received 
that wonderfully happy temper and thorough breeding, 
where the Teutonic supplied the material strength, the 
Romanic the suppleness and freedom of expression. Nay 
the English language, which has borne, not as it were by 
mere chance, the greatest Poet of modern times, great in 
his very contrast with ancient classical poetry, — I speak 
of course of Shakespeare — this English language may truly 
be called a world-language, and seems, like England herself, 
but in a still higher degree, destined to rule over all the 
corners of the earth. In wealth, wisdom, and strict eco- 
nomy, none of the living languages can vie with it." 

We shall now consider the last branch of the Arian Windic lan- 
family, commonly called Slavonic — a language spoken over 
vast tracts of country, on the confines of Asia and Europe, 
on the threshold between barbarism and civilisation, and 
as yet without a national literature in any of its numerous 
branches, though not without its counterfeits of Voltaire 
and Byron, of Wieland and Gothe: — with powerful re- 
sources, and flexible as Greek and Latin; yet all, as it 
were, without self-respect and self-dependence, always 
looking abroad and vainly decking itself with the tinsel 
of foreign countries, instead of gathering strength from 
within and putting forth without shame the genuine fruits 
of its own not barren soil. This applies particularly to 
the modern Russian, for Bohemian and Polish may boast 
in a certain sense of an ancient national literature and of 
an advanced civilisation which was crushed by political 
misfortunes. There are signs also in Bohemia and in parts 
of Russia, of an awakening national feeling in literature 
and of a healthy reaction against foreign influences. 

It would be better to use Windic as the general name 
of what is now called the Slavonic branch, Winidae 
being one of the most ancient and most comprehensive 
names by which these tribes were known to the early 
historians of Europe. We have to distinguish again 



66 



LetUc Divi- 
sion. 



Prussian. 



Letlisli. 



between the Lettic and the Slavonic divisions, and it 
would be preferable not to use Slavonic in two different 
senses. 

I. The Lettic division comprises the Lithuanian, 
the Old Prussian, and the Lettish. The Lithunian, 
as we had occasion to point out before, is one of the 
most interesting languages to the comparative philologist, 
because, though poor in literature — (for the Lithuanian 
popular songs are all that can be called such in a national 
sense) — it has retained to the present day some of the most 
primitive features of Arian grammar. It was once spoken, 
according to Mielcke, within the limits of East Prussia, 
in the districts of Memel, Tilsit, Ragnit, Labiau, and 
Insterburg; and through the division of Poland, more 
Lithuanian subjects were added to the kingdom of Prus- 
sia, so that the number of Prussians, who speak Li- 
thuanian, is now stated at 200,000. But this amount, is 
diminishing steadily, and in one or two generations Li- 
thuanian will probably have to be counted among the 
dead languages, like Cornish in England. In Russia, the 
number of Lithuanians is estimated at 1, '282,000. 

The Old Prussian has been an extinct language since 
the end of the 17th century. Formerly spoken on the 
Northern coast. East of the Vistula, it has left no litera- 
ture behind, except a translation of a catechism. 

Lettish is the language of Kurland and Livonia, more 
modern in its grammar than Lithuanian, and standing towards 
it, not in the relation of daughter to mother, but rather 
of niece to aunt. 

The entire number of persons who speak Lithuanian 
and Lettish, in Prussia and Russia, is estimated by Sa- 
farik at 2,000,000. North of Memel the English fleet 
will hear Lithuanian and Lettish spoken at Liebau, in the 
Gulf of Riga. On the northern side of the Gulf, the 
Lettish is bounded by the Esthonian, a Finnic dialect, 
which occupies all the rest of the coast as far as Kron- 
stadt and Petersburg. The Lettic as well as the Esthonic 
population supply a considerable contingent to the Rus- 
sian navy. 



67 

The Slavonic branch is divided again into two ereat Slavonic 

^ <^ Blanch. 

dialects , each represented by a number of national idioms. 
These are the South-Eastern and Western dialects, and 
may be distinguished by certain phonetic peculiarities. 

I. The South-Eastern dialect comprises: 

1. The Russian, divided again into Great-Ru s- 
sian, Little-Russian, and White-Russian. 

2. Bulgarian, represented under its most ancient 
form in the Ecclesiastical Slavonic, and 
spoken at present in the province of Bulgaria, 
one seat of the war. The Ecclesiastical Slavonic 
is the language of the translation of the Bible 
by Cyrillus in the 9th century, which we have 
in Mss. of the eleventh. It was formerly con- 
sidered as the root of all Slavonic dialects, but 
it is really the parent of the Bulgarian only. 
This is Safarik's opinion. Micklosich calls the 
Ecclesiastical Slavonic "lingua Palseo-Slovenica", 
and Kopitar also considers it as a Carinthian 
dialect; but neither of these scholars has brought 
proofs convincing as those by which Safarik 
establishes the close connection between the pre- 
sent Bulgarian and the language of Cyrillus. 

3. The Illyrian, which is a general name for the 
Servian, Kroatian, and Slovenian. The 
Servian is written either with Roman or with 
Cyrillic letters. The former is patronised by 
the Roman, the latter by the Greek Church. 
The Slovenian comprises the Windian, Car- 
niolian, Carinthian and Styrian idioms. 
The Kroatian, according to 8afarik , should 
not be reckoned as a separate language; the pro- 
vincial Kroatian being but a continuation of the 
Slovenian , while the language of the Kroats, as 
spoken on the military frontier, is simply Servian. 

II. The Western dialect comprises: 

1. Polish. 

2. Bohemian or Tchechian, spoken in Bohemia, 



68 

Moravia and Hungary, and of which the Slova- 

kian, found in Hungary, is but a less developed 

remnant. 
3. Wendian or Serbian, as spoken in Upper 

and Lower Lusatia. 
i. Polabian, an extinct language, formerly in 

existence on the Elbe. 

Relation of Although it is possible to point out characteristic marks 

the South- , , . , , -,. , , , 

Eastern and by which these two great dialects can be kept separate, 
Slavonic Still in their grammar and words they differ much less 
anguages. ^^^^ English and German. People who speak languages 
belonging to the Western or South-Eastern division, are 
to a certain extent mutually intelligible. A Bohemian, 
according to 8afarik, understands a Slovak of Hungary, 
a Slovak understands the Polish, a Pole the language of 
Lusatia. The same applies to Russians and lUyrians : less 
to the Bulgarians. But even the Russian and the Pole, 
though belonging to different divisions, have so many words 
and grammatical forms in common that they do not find 
much more difficulty in conversing together than Italians 
and Spaniards. Panslavistic writers maintain that the va- 
rious vSlavonic dialects do not differ more widely than 
the four principal dialects of the ancient Greek — Attic, 
Ionic, Doric, and jEolic. As we go back into antiquity, 
the differences between the Slavonic languages become 
even less: yet from the ninth century, when we have the 
first literary documents, the fundamental distinction between 
South-Eastern and Western dialects is clearly established. 
A Russian, however, at the present day, can, with some 
attention , understand the Bulgarian of the ninth century, 
as fixed in the translation of the Bible, still used in all 
Russian churches. I shall here give some of these characte- 
ristic differences as laid down by Safarik. It will be seen 
that they can be of real importance only for the minutest 
researches of the philologist, yet as "pieces justificatives" 
they may find a place here. 

I. In the South-Eastern dialects d and t before 1 are 
dropped; they are retained in the Western branch. 



69 

Ex. Eccles. Slav. opo^-Ao, ora-lo, a plough; Bohem. 
ora-dto. (cf. apo-Tpov, aratrum.) Eccl. Slav. n^At, 
palo fallen, participle of the root pad, to fall, 
with the termination 16; Bohemian padl. 

II. In the South-Eastern dialects d and t are dropped 
before n; they are retained in the Western branch. 

Ex. Russian, BflHyilll^, Bohemian vadnouti, from 
the root BH/\, vad, and Hyiiih , nute. 

III. In the South-Eastern dialects an 1 is put before 
every palatal semi-vowel (y), if preceded by a labial; this 
is not the case in the Western branch (1 epentheticum). 

Ex. Eccl. Slav, zemly (aeM^rx), earth; Polish ziemia. 

Eccl. SI. korablye, (Kopa6.\b); Pol. and Boh. 

korab', ship. 
Other words by which the difference between an Eastern 
and Western dialect can be recognized are, according to 
Dobrowsky, (Bohemian Grammar, iv. and Institutiones, § 1 ), 

SOUTH-EASTERN. WESTERN 

1 . raz, razum. roz, rozum. 

^. iz, izdati. wy, wydati. 

3. pec, moc, noc. pec, moc, noc. 

4. zwiezda. hwiezda, gwiazda. 

5. toj. ten. 

6. Genitive, ago. ego, eho- 
Dative, omu. emu. 

7. ptika. ptak. 

The area at present occupied by the Slavonic race, Area occu- 
extends from Asia into Europe, from the Dwina in the East Slavonic 
to the frontiers of Germany in the West, from the Sea ^"o^''*^*^* 
in the North to the Sea in the South of Europe. Sla- 
vonic names of cities and rivers in the interior of Ger- 
many, show that these races once were in occupation as 
far west as the Elbe; and Slavonic dialects are still spoken, 
though by small and disconnected tribes, in Lusatia, not 
far from Berlin and Leipzig. But while the Slavonic race 
has been repulsed in the West, it has extended itself in 
the East towards Asia, and is now the language of law 



70 



South- 

Eastern 

languages. 

Russian. 



Great-Rus- 
sians. 



Liltle-Rus- 
sians. 



and civilization in the North of Asia, whence it stretches 
over to America. 

The language, politically most important among the 
Slavonic races, is the Russian. It is hemmed in on 
the West by the Polish, Hungarian, and Wallachian lan- 
guages. In the North and South it reaches as far as the 
sea, and in the East it encroaches upon Finnic and Ta- 
taric populations. We shall give the geographical limits of 
the three Russian dialects, that of the Great-Russians, 
the Little-Russians, and White-Russians, as deter- 
mined by 5afarik, on grammatical grounds : because these 
three originally different races, can at present be dis- 
tinguished by the pecularities of their dialects only. 

The Great-Russians inhabit the governments of Mos- 
cow, Petersburg, Novgorod, Vologda, Pskov, Tver, Ya- 
roslav, Kostroma, Vladimir, Nizhni Novgorod, Smolensk, 
Kaluga , Tula , Riazan , Penza , Simbirsk , Orel , Kursk, 
Voronezh, Tambov, Saratov, and the country of the 
Cossacks of the Don. The greatest part of the governments 
of Orenburg, Viatka, Perm, and Kasan, is inhabited by 
the same race, which daily absorbs more and more the 
remnants of the Finnic nations, and of the Tatars yet 
extant in those provinces. A line drawn from Lake Pei- 
pus to the mouth of the Don, would very nearly mark 
the frontier of the Great-Russian towards the Little and 
White-Russian dialects. Great-Russians are, further, spread 
over all Siberia, Kamchatka, and the Russian colonies 
on the north-western coast of America. There are many 
settlements of the Great-Russians in various parts of an- 
cient Poland, formed under the Polish dominion by the 
Raskolniks or Russian sectarians, who fled from their 
country on account of religious persecution. A few of 
the same kind exist beyond the Danube in the Turkish 
dominions. The Great-Russian idiom is now the literary 
and official language of Russia. 

The Little Russians or Russines resemble, in their 
physical and moral qualities other Slavonic nations more 
than their namesakes. Their language differs from the 
Muscovite idiom, and forms, in some measure, a transition 



71 



between that and Polish. Nestor calls them Polanes, 
which signifies inhabitants of the fields (Campani), and 
asserts they are of the same nation as the Lekhs of the 
Vistula, i.e. the Poles. Their language is said to be one 
of the finest Slavonic tongues, few equalling its power 
in the expression of tender feelings, and their literature, 
though limited to popular songs and ballads, replete with 
poetical beauties. The Russines inhabit the Russian go- 
vernments of Poltava, Kharkov, Tchernigov, Kiev, Vol- 
hynia, Podolia, and parts of those of Ekaterinoslav, Voro- 
nezh , Kherson, Taurida, and Bessarabia, as well as the 
country of the Cossacks of the Black Sea. In the kingdom 
of Poland, they occupy parts of the provinces of Lublin 
and Padlachia. In Gallicia, or Austrian Poland, the circles 
of Lemberg, Przemysl, Zloczov, Zolkiev, Tarnopol, Brze- 
zany, Sambor, Sanok, Stry, Stanislawow, Kolomea, Czort- 
kow, and in part those of Rzeszow, Novysandec, and 
Tchernowitz. In Hungary, the greater part of the comi- 
tats of Beregh, Unghvar, Ugocza, and Marmaros, and a 
small portion of those of Zemplin and Szaros. It is the 
dialect of the South of Russia from Gallicia to the Don. 
The Rusniaks or Ruthenians in Gallicia, Hungary, and 
Bukovina speak the Little-Russian dialect: though with 
some peculiarities. 

The White-Russians occupy the whole of the Rus- Whiie-Rus 
sian Governments of Mohilev and Minsk, and the greatest 
part of those of Vitepsk and Grodno, extending even 
over a part of those of Vilna and Bialystok. Their dia- 
lect was formerly the official language of Lithuanian, and 
is full of Polish expressions. They are called White- 
Russians in opposition to the original Russian race, in- 
habiting the central provinces of Russia which are still 
called Black-Russia (Czernaja Rusj). 

Although the Cossack repudiates the idea of being des- 
cended from either the Great or the Little-Russians, he has 
been proved to be Great-Russian by blood, though conside- 
rably mixed with Little-Russian. Koppen (p. 1 bi) accounts 
for this mixture by the war against the Turks in 1oG9. The 
Turks had invested Astrachan , and Czar Johann IV, called 



sians. 



72 

on Prince Michajlo Wishnewezkij to assist him. The army 
of Prince Mich ajlo was chiefly collected at Tcherkassy in the 
Government of Kiev, whence the name of Tcherkassian or 
Tcherkaskian for the Little-Russian peasants on the Don; 
hence also the name of the chief city in the country of the 
Don-Cossacks, Tcherkask, founded in 1570, and rebuilt, as 
Novo Tcherkask in 1 805. Antiquities which are found in the 
neighbourhood attest the former presence of various tribes in 
this part of Russia. Inscriptions were found here belonging 
to the Bosporian Kings Rhoemetalkes (132 — 154 A. D.) 
and Ininthimaeos (237 A. D.). They were published by 
Graefe in the Memoires de I'Academie des Sciences de St. 
Petersbourg; VI. Serie; Sciences politiques, T. YII(1 844, 8), 
p. 24. Ancient stone images have been also found in the 
steppes, and now serve the inhabitants as scarecrows. The 
races to which these idols belonged, the nations ruled by 
the Bosporian kings, and in more modern times, tribes even 
from the Caucasus, have all contributed their share toward 
the formation of the Cossack, and hence the conflicting 
opinions as to his real nationality. 
Bulgarians. The territory on which Bulgarian is spoken at the 

present day lies almost entirely within the Turkish domi- 
nions; only a small area to the North of the arms of the 
Danube being under Russian sovereignty. Eastward the 
Bulgarian is bounded by the Black Sea; from the mouth 
of the southern arm of the Danube this river forms the 
northern frontier towards the Wallachians as far as Widin 
and Florentin, with the exception of the tract between 
the towns of Tultch and Reni, where the Bulgarian ex- 
tends across the river towards Russia. The frontier is 
here indicated by the towns of Ismail, Kalpak, Faltchi, 
and thence southwards along the river Pruth, which here 
forms the frontier between Russia and Moldavia, and 
between the Wallachians and the Bulgarians down to the 
Danube. From Widin the frontier extends along the 
Servian territory as far as Prizren (Perserin), and hence 
southward past the towns of Tettovo, Ochrida, Drenovo, 
Bilista (or Bichlista) as far as St. Marina; hence the 
Southern frontier line forms a slight bend round the Gulf 



73 



of Tliessalonica, and thence continues in the direction of 
the towns of Rupa, Arda, Tchermenti, Adrian ople, Tir- 
novo, and Vasiliko to the Black Sea again. Thus the 
Bulgarians occupy the greater part of the ancient Moesia, 
Thracia, and Macedonia, or the present province of 
Rumelia. The name Bulgarian was transferred to the 
original Slavonic inhabitants of that country after they 
were conquered by the Bulgars, an Uralic race, towards 
the end of the 7th Century. The Slavonic element, however, 
began soon to prevail over that of the foreign conquerors, 
and after two hundred years, nothing but the name indi- 
cated the barbarous origin of the prospering Bulgarian 
Kingdom. In the middle of the ninth Century Christianity 
began to spread over the country and the translation of the 
Bible by Methodius and Cyrillus was the forerunner of other 
literary works. This incipient civilisation, however, was 
destroyed by the inroads of the Magyars in the beginning 
of the eleventh Century. Before the arrival of the Ma- 
gyars, the Plawzi and Pechenegs, that is during the as- 
cendancy of the Bulgarian kingdom, the Bulgarian lan- 
guage was spoken beyond its present limits in the coun- 
tries along the Danube, now inhabited by Magyars and 
Wallachians. It extended from the Danube to the Pruth 
and Jager, and beyond to the Karpathian mountains and 
the sources of the Theiss. When these countries lying- 
North of the Danube were inundated by the Magyars and 
similar Finnic tribes, the original inhabitants retired below 
it. The Bulgarian of the 9th Century, the language of 
the translation of the Bible by Cyrillus, remained the 
literary language of Russia to the \ 4th Century , and 
is still the ecclesiastical language of the Greek-Russian 
church in Russia, Servia and Bulgaria. It holds the same 
place in Slavonic philology which Gothic occupies in the 
history of the German idioms. The spoken Bulgarian, 
on the contrary, so far as grammatical forms are concer- 
ned, is the most reduced among the Slavonic dialects. 

Illyrian is used as a general name to comprehend iilyrian. 
the Servian, Kroatian and Slovenian dialects. The name 
Illyria was revived by Napoleon in 1809. Illyrian im- 



lects. 



74 

plies sometimes the Slovenian and Kroatian, as opposed 
to the Servian. Religious and political agitation has made 
"Illyrian" the watchword for the Roman Catholic popu- 
lation of these South-Slavonic countries; "Servian" that 
of the Greek church; the former using the Roman, the 
latter the Cyrillic alphabet. Another party, the Pansla- 
vistic, allows no difference between Illyrians and Servians, 
whether in nationality or language. These South-Sla- 
vonic dialects are spoken West of Bulgaria, occupying 
the western half of the peninsula to the Adriatic, while the 
Bulgarian occupies the eastern part towards the Black Sea. 
Area occu- A rough outline of the whole Illyrian territorv would 

pied by the ^ j j 

Illyrian dia- be formed by a line drawn from the Adriatic Sea, near 
the mouth of the Bojana River, to Perserin (Prizren) in 
Albania, this line being somewhat inclined towards the 
North. A line from Perserin to Widin on the Danube 
would separate the Illyrian (here Servian) from the Bul- 
garian. A line from Widin to Temesvar would divide 
the Illyrian from the Wallachian; and a line from Te- 
mesvar to Klagenfurt from Magyar and German neighbours. 
A line from Klagenfurt back to Trieste would close the 
circle within which Illyrian dialects are to be met with. 
The Adriatic coast is partly occupied by Italian dialects, 
which encroach upon the Slavonic in the north , but di- 
minish gradually in breadth as we proceed southward. 

These frontiers, however, are far too narrow for the 
national aspirations of what may be called the Young- 
Illyrian party. The founder of this party is Dr. Ludewit 
Gaj, the editor of a newspaper which has become the 
standard of the literary Illyrian language. In Illyria, in 
Styria, in Dalmatia, in Croatia, Slavonia, and Servia, 
there existed not long ago about twenty different dialects, 
and each had in certain localities assumed the dignity of 
a literary language with its own peculiar orthography. 
It was in I S35 that Gaj began the publication of his Croa- 
tian Newspaper, which originally addressed itself to the 
provincial Croatians only. In 1836, however, this assumed 
the title of a National Illyrian Newspaper, appealing no 
longer to the provincial Croatians alone, but to all who 



75 

in Dalmatia, Istria, Croatia, Slavonia, Servia, Bosnia, 
Montenegro, Carniola, Carinthia and Styria spoke the 
common lUyrian language. "The poorer and less culti- 
vated provincial Croatian, he says, must make room for 
the rich and harmonious lllyrian language, as spoken by 
the people and fixed by early writers, and at the same 
time a more rational orthography must be introduced." 
This attempt has been successful, and instead of many 
Croatian and Windian dialects, the Southern Slaves have 
gained a common national and cultivated language. 

Gaj has found many followers, and Agram has become 
the literary capital of Illyria. Hungarian intolerance has 
strengthened the unity of his party, which has further 
a certain political importance. His enthusiastic follo- 
wers speak of an "Illyria", of which the frontiers are 
the Adriatic, the Aegaean, and the Black Sea, and which 
comprises Carinthia, Carniola, Styria, Gorz, Istria, the 
Litorale, Dalmatia, Ragusa, Montenegro, Herzegovina, 
Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, Slavonia, the Banat with the 
South of Hungary, part of Albania, Bulgaria, and even 
the northern districts of Macedonia. This Illyria, however 
does not yet exist; in fact the unbounded enthusiasm of 
its advocates has provoked a natural reaction from the 
very nations which it meant to embrace. The Servians, 
particularly, object to the name of Illyrians, and main- 
tain their own nationality, which is supported by a diife- 
rence of religion (the Servians belonging to the Greek 
church), and by a difference of alphabet (the Servians 
adhering to the CyrilHc letters). This natural division 
between the Illyrians, i. e. the Croatians and Sloventzi 
on the one side, and the Servians on the other, will prove 
a strong impediment to the realisation of the Great-IUyrian 
nationality. 

If we make this distinction between Illyrians and Ser- Frontier 

1 Til • Ml 1 11 T between the 

vians, the Illyrians will be separated by a line begmning from Servians 
the town Monoschtur, at the mouth of the river Lobnitza illyrians. 
(Lafnitz) which falls into the Raab , in the Comitat Eisen- 
burg in Hungary. This line extends along that river 
while it forms the limit between Hungary and Styria, 



76 

then turns into Styria and Illyria , passing the towns of 
Radkersburg, Volkermarkt, Klagenfurt, Villach, to Pon- 
tafel; thence southward, along the small towns of Resciutta? 
and Bardo, towards Udine, and then, following pretty closely 
the course of the Isonzo to the Adriatic sea, it extends 
along the sea-coast until below Capo d'lstria. Here it 
takes an eastern direction , passing the towns of Materia, 
Laas, and the German colony of Gotschze (Hoczewje) 
to Neustadtel, Motting, Petrinia, and the mouth ot the 
Unna, which falls into the Save on the Turkish frontier. 
Hence it recedes northwards past the towns of Novka, 
Chasma, and Belovar, until it reaches Verocze on the Drave, 
behind which river it touches the Magyar frontier at Gross- 
Scigeth. Here it runs west again, past the towns of Breznitz, 
Kanisa, Lindava (Lendva) and Csesztreg, until it rejoins 
Monoschtur. The smaller or eastern portion of this ter- 
ritory is inhabited by Kroats or Chorwats, and the lar- 
ger and western portion by the Sloventsi. 

The Kroatian or Chorvatian dialect is chiefly 
spoken in the Comitats of Agram, Kreuz, and Warasdin, 
and numerous colonies exist in the western parts of Hun- 
gary. The language stands between Slovenian and Ser- 
vian, more closely allied to the latter, and at present, 
particularly at Agram , influenced by a small literary party, 
who endeavour to introduce Slovenian and Cyrillic ex- 
pressions into the spoken language of the people. Thus 
the Dual, which according to Berlic is unknown in the 
spoken language of Kroatia, and exists only in Slovenian, 
has been introduced into literary works, and terminations 
are used in the declensions which have a warrant only in 
the Cyrillic translation of the Bible. 
Slovenian. Slovenian, also called Corutanian or Windian, is 

spoken in the country surrounded by the Adriatic, the 
Upper Drave and Kroatia. It is the language of a great 
part ot Styria, Carinthia, and Carniola, and reaches into 
the west of Hungary, the Illyrian coast and part of Istria. 
Servian The territory occupied by the Servians is bordered 

on the west by the Adriatic from Capo dTstria to the 
river Bojana. The southern frontier separating the Ser- 



Kroalian. 



77 



vians from the Albanians, extends from the lake of Scu- 
tari towards the towns of Rosalia, Ipek, and Jakova^ 
as far as Prizren (Perserin). Here begins the eastern 
frontier towards the Bulgarians, passing the towns of Mo- 
rava, Nova Berda, and Nissa, as far as Gurguchevatz, 
and following thence the Timok, the boundary until 
it falls into the Danube. The Danube then forms the 
limit towards the A^allachians^ as far as Golubatch, 
where the line crossing that river extends past the towns 
of Szaszka, Weisskirchen , Denta, Ritberg, and Temesvar, 
as far as Arad: then westward along the small towns of 
Lak, Marienfeld, Kaniza, Topolya, and Mohacz to Scigeth, 
and along the Illyrian frontier to Capo dTstria. 

This extensive area comprises within the Austrian do- 
minions the southern Comitats of Hungary, the whole of 
Slavonia, a great part of Kroatia and Carniola, Istria, the 
Littoral, Dalmatia and the military frontier of Kroatia, 
Slavonia, and Hungary, — and within the Turkish domi- 
nions, the principalities of Servia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, 
Montenegro , and the ancient Rascia (the territory between 
NoAd Bazar and Nova Berda). The Servian population 
belongs partly to the Roman Catholic and Greek per- 
suasions, partly to the Mohammedan. There is a sprink- 
ling of Magyars, Germans, Italians, Albanians, Turks, 
Wallachians, and Rusnyaks over the whole of Servia. On 
the other hand there are considerable Servian colonies in 
Hungary and Russia. The most important is that of "New 
Servia" on the Dniepr, founded between 1751 — 53. It 
consists of about 100,000 inhabitants. 

According to Vuk Stephanowitch the Servian is di- 
vided into three dialects: 

1. The dialect of Herzegovina, Bosnia, Montenegro, 
Dalmatia, Kroatia, and the upper part of Ser\da, in 
the district of Matchwa, as far as Maljewo and Karano- 
watz. 

2. The Ressawian dialect, spoken in the district of 
Branitshevo, on the Resava, in the district of Levatsh, 
on the Upper Morava, and along the Schwarzbach, as far 
as Negotin. 



78 

3. The Syrmian, spoken in Syrmia, Slavonia, in the 
Batchka, in the Banat of Temesvar, and in Servia, between 
the Save, the Danube, and the Morava. 

The Magyars and Slovaks call the Servians of the 
Greek persuasion. Razes, from Rass, the former capital 
of Servia, now Novi Bazar. 

We now come to the Western branch. 

Western The frontier-line of the territory inhabited by the 

languages. r» 

Poles in the north is the coast of the Baltic, from the pro- 
montory of Hela, in the gulf of Putzig, along the sea 
as far as the Lake of Schmolsin; then westward, toward 
the German nation; at first along the Pommeranian fron- 
tier to the neighbourhood of Butow, in the direction of 
the towns of Jastrow, Wirsitz, Chodzies, Filehne, Mese- 
ritz, Lissa, Bojawono, Rawicz, Wartenberg, and Rosen- 
berg; next westward, as far as the mouth of the Neisse, 
which falls into the Oder below Brieg, and along the river 
Biala toward Zuckmantel, on the Austrian frontier. Here, 
after a bend in an easterly direction, it falls in with the 
frontier of the Bohemo-Moravian dialect, in the neighbour- 
hood of Troppau. The Polish language comes into con- 
tact with this dialect from Oderberg along the course of 
the Oder, down to the Carpathian ridge. Hence the 
southern frontier extends toward the Slovaks, along the 
foot of the Carpathians as far as Piwniczna, where the 
Poprad forms the limit between the three populations of 
the Poles, the Slovaks, and the Russines. The southern 
frontier towards the Russines runs through Gallicia, past 
the towns of Sandec, Biecz, Krosno, Brozozow: — hence 
the eastern frontier extends straight northwards, past the 
towns of Przeworzk Lezaisk, Krzeszow, Goray, Turobin, 
Krasnoslav, Radzyn, Miedzyryc; along the river Zna, to- 
wards Biala and Sarnaki; and thence also eastwards along 
the boundary of the White Russians, in the direction of 
the towns of Bransk, Tykoczyn, Knyszyn, Stabin, Lipsk, 
and as far as Grodno. The Niemen forms in part the 
north-western frontier toward the Lithuanians. From this 
river it follows the Hansze as far as Seyny, then west- 
ward towards Oletzko, near which place it returns to the 



79 



Prussian territory, descending by the town of Goldapp to 
Darkehmen. Hence it takes a westerly course, through 
the ancient kingdom of Prussia, touched by the German 
frontier near the towns of Rastenburg, Bischofsburg, and 
Seeburg; then to the mouth of the Welle, which disem- 
bogues into the Drewenz above Neumark. It reaches 
nearly to the Vistula, but turns south, past the town of 
Culm, to Thorn. Here it crosses the Vistula, and turns 
towards the Netze till il reaches Nakel, when, taking a 
northern course, it accompanies the western side of the 
Vistula to the point where that river divides. After fol- 
lowing the river for several miles, it bends off, below 
Derschau and before it reaches Dantzig, and ends in the 
Bay of Putzig. Besides the inhabitants of this territory, 
all the upper classes in the ancient provinces of Poland 
are composed of Poles by origin , and of others who 
became Polonized during the Polish dominion in those 
parts. The language of Gallicia is Polish. 

The old name of the Polish language was Lekhian, 
spoken in ancient times beyond its present limit, in parts of 
Pommerania and Silesia now occupied by Germans. At 
present it exists in two dialects, Polish and Kashubian, 
— the latter spoken in a small district between Leba and 
Lauenburg by about 100,000 people. Here the English 
fleet may hear it on the Baltic coast. 

The limits of the Bohemian population may be mark- 
ed by a line beginning between the towns of Josephstadt 
and Konigshof, which are on the Bohemian side, and 
Turnau and Semile, on the German. This line runs from 
the last-named place in a northwestern direction along 
the towns of Aupa, Bohmisch-Aicha, Leitmeritz, Tlieresien- 
stadt, Laun, Pilsen, Mies, Bischofteinitz, as far as Klenz; 
thence it turns in a south-eastern direction along the towns 
of Winterberg, Krummau, Gratzen, Neuhaus, Moravian-Bud- 
weis (Budwitz), Znaym, Lundenburg, as far as Rabens- 
burg, on the river March. Hence to the north-east, touching 
the Slovaks, in an almost straight line, along the towns 
Holitsch, Strasnitz, and Wessely, to the Carpathian ridge, 
where it comes into contact with the Poles of Galicia. 



Bohemian. 



80 

From this point the river Oder forms the frontier as far 
as Oderberg. Bohemian is spoken in the whole of the 
district of Troppau. Passing then from Sternberg, along 
the Sudet mountains, through Moravian-Neustadt, it returns 
to Konigshof. The territory within this line comprehends 
a space of about 830 German square miles, which, with 
the exception of few German colonies, is inhabited by 
a pure Slavonic population. 

Another name for the language of Bohemia and Mo- 
ravia is Tchechian. Some literary monuments of the ancient 
Tchech language exist, as the song of Libussa of the ninth 
century, and poems of the thirteenth, exhibiting a much 
richer grammatical system than the spoken Bohemian. This 
is divided again into dialects, Horakian, Hanakian, Mo- 
ravo-Slovakian,Wallachian, and others. Since the beginning 
of this century a new impulse has been given to the na- 
tional literature of Bohemia, chiefly by the exertions of 
Dobrowsky, Safarik, and Palaeky. Safarik's works on 
Slavonic antiquities have acquired a European reputation: 
they are the chief authority for all that is known of the 
ethnology, history and language of Bohemia and of the 
whole Slavonic race. 
siovakian. The language of the Slovaks has retained in its gram- 

mar certain original forms which the Bohemian has lost. 
It is spoken by the Slovaks, who are separated from the 
Bohemians on the north-west by a line already mentioned. 
Thence the boundary continues along the Carpathian ridge 
to the town of Piwniczna, separating the Slovaks from 
the Poles in Gallicia. From that place it runs through 
the towns Bordijow, and Humene (Homona), and follows 
the course of the river Ondava, which parts off the Rus- 
sines in Gallicia and Hungary. On the south the Slovaks 
are divided from the Magyars by a line running through 
the towns Kaschau, Tornala (Torna), Filekovo (Fulek), 
from the river Eipel as far as Hont; — thence along 
the towns of Zeviza, Neuhausel, nearly to Comorn 
and Pressburg; then following the course of the Danube 
to the mouth of the river March. The same river, 
separates them on the West from the Germans. The 



81 



territory inhabited by the Slovaks extends over fifteen 
Comitats, of which five are entirely, and the rest prin- 
cipally, occupied by them. There are besides several large 
settlements of Slovaks scattered over different parts of 
Hungary. 

The last Slavonic dialect is the Wendian, spoken Wendian ot 

■n-r -, n -r ^^ i i i • i Lusalian. 

by the Wends oi Lusatia, whose number though variously 
stated, probably does not exceed 150,000. They are the 
remnants of those Slavonians by whom all that country 
was formerly inhabited, and whose settlements extended 
beyond the Elbe to the river Saale. They are called by 
a general name the Polabes (from po, near, and Labe, 
the Elbe). The Wends inhabit the region around the 
towns of Lobau, Neusalz, Budissin, Camenz, Spremberg, 
Liibben, Lieberosa, Cottbus and Muskav, forming a kind 
of Slavonian island in a German sea. Their language is 
also called Sorbian, and divided into two dialects, each 
possessing, besides popular songs, translations of the Bible, 
and other sacred works. Though German is taught now 
in every school, yet the common people cling to their 
national dialect and prefer to speak "serski." 

The following is an estimate of the Slavonic popu- Slavonic 
lation: ^^^'•^'''^^- 

1. Great-Russians (Welikoruski) . . 35,000,000 

2. Little-Russians (Maloruski). . . . 13,000,000 

3. White-Russians (Beloruski) . . . '^,700,000 

4. Bulgarians (Bolgari) 3,600,000 

5. Kroatians (Horvv^ati) 800,000 

6. Slovenians (Slovenzi) 1,150,000 

7. Servians 5,300,000 

8. Poles (Polaki) 9,300,000 

9. Bohemians (Czechi) 7,200,000 

10, Wends (Syrbi) 150,000 

78,200,000 

This gives for the Eastern branch 62,000,000 

„ for the Western branch 17,000,000 

79,000,000 
6 



82 



According to their religion the Slavonic races were 
arranged by 5afarik (in 1842) in the following table: — * 





Greek or 
Eastern 
Church. 


Greek' 

united 

with 

Rome. 


Roman Protes- 
Catholics. tants. 


Moham- 
medans. 


Great Russians, or Muscovites 
Little Russians, or Malorusses 

White Russians 

Bulgarians 

Servians or lUyrians 

Kroats .... . 


35,314,000 

10,154.000 
2,376,000 
3,287,000 
2.880,000 


2,990,000 


350,000 

50.000 

1,864.000 

801.000 
1.138,000 
8,923,000 
4.270.000 

1.953,000 


13,000 
442.000 
144.000 

800.000 
88.000 
44.000 


250,000 

5:i0,ooo 


Carynthians 

Poles 

Bohemians and Moravians . . 
Slovaks (in the North of Hun- 
gary) . . 














10,000 






















Total 


54,011.000 


2,990.000 


19,.359.000 


1.531.000 


800,000 



According to the States to which they belong, the 
Slavonic races were arranged by Safarik (in 1842) in the 
following table : — 





Russia. 


Austria. 


Prussia. 


Turkey. 


Repub- 
lic of 
Cracow. 


Sax 
ony 


Total. 


Great Russians 

Little Russians 

White Russians 

Bulgarians 


35,314,000 

10,370,000 

2.726,000 

80,000 

100,000 


2.774;000 

7.b6o 

2.594,000 
801,000 
1.151,000 
2.3-41,000 
4,370,000 
2,753,000 






3,5o6,6ob 

2.600.000 






. 35,314,000 

. 13.144.000 

. 2.726.(W 

3 587 OiX) 


Servians and lUvrians . . . 
Kroats ......' 


. 5.294.000 
801 .000 


Carynthians 

Poles .... 

Bohemians and Moravians 

Slovaks in North Hungary 

Lusatians or Wends. Upper 

,, ,, Lower 


4.912.000 



'3L 


2,000 

t.OOO 




130'.0b6 


66.6( 


. 1.151 ,0(;0 
. 9,365,000 

. 4.414,0C'0 
. 2,753.000 
X) 98 000 


44.000 






44 000 












Total 


53.502.000 


16 791,000 


2,1 OJ 


5,000 


6,100.000 


130.000 


60,0( 


)0 78,691,000 



Political Numerically as well as politically, the Russians stand 

"^the^G^ea^t*^ at present in the van of the Slavonic races, while for- 

Russians. merly the Poles held a place much more important in 

the political system of Europe. In the sixteenth century 

the Russian eagle began to try his wings, after shaking 

* 5afarik's figures of population, according to a letter from 
the Hon. H. Stanley, H. M. Secretary cf Legation at Athens, are 
less correct than those of Ubicini in his Lettres sur la Turquie. 
May not Safarik have been guided by linguistic and ethnological 
evidence, while Ubicini's figures are based on political statistics? 



83 



off the yoke of the Mongolians, who for nearly two 
hundred years had held Russia in the most cruel vassa- 
lage. The first conquests of the Russians were near the 
Volga : 

In 1552, they conquer the countries along the middle 

course of the Volga. 
1554, the Lower Volga. 
1577, the Lower Don. 
1581, they cross the Ural. 

1584, thej occupy the middle course of the Ob. 
1594 — 96, they take the countries watered by the 

Irtis. 
1608, the Lower Ob. 
1620—30, the Yenisei. 

After thus conquering the north, the Russian arms 
turned to the South and the Caucasus. 

In 1630 — 40 they take the Baikal lake and the Lena- 
country. 

1646, the Behring Straits. 

1 658, they cross the Southern Siberian mountains, 
and advance into Mongolia, along the Chinese 
river Amur. They found NyerAinsk. 

1690, they take KamAatka, and push along the 
Aleute islands into America; while in Europe 
they advance to the Don and Dniepr. 

1721, they take the coast of the Finnic Bay and 
the Gulf of Riga, thus securing the ground on 
which now stands the capital of the Russian 
empire, Petersburg. 

1743, Karelia taken. 

1783, Kj-imea taken. 

1774, Country to the north of the Krimea annexed. 

1791, they advance against Tataric tribes as far as 
the Dniestr. 

1 802, Georgia is annexed. 

1812, Bessarabia conquered. 

1813, Daghestan and 8irwan taken. 

6* 



84 



1828, Ab^hasia , Mingrelia, and Araxes - countries 

taken. 
1 809, Sweden taken as far as the Bothnian Gulf. 
1812, Advance to the Pruth in Wallachia. 
1828, the mouth of the Danube secured. 
1848, Principalities occupied against revolutionary 

tendencies. 

1853, Principalities occupied as a material gua- 
rantee. 

1854, Declaration, that Russia does not aim at 
conquest. 



Genealogical We have thus completed our survey of the second 
tables of the ^ . -^ 

Arian Fa- family of languages, and the following table will give a 

general view of all the members which can be proved to 
belong to it. Each column begins with the languages 
now spoken. These are traced back to their previous 
stages, wherever literary monuments have been preserved, 
and are then referred to the different classes, branches, 
and divisions, which all took their origin from one central 
language, the language of the Arian ancestors. Since their 
first separation took place, in times previous to Homer, 
Zoroaster, and the poets of the Veda, no new roots have 
been added to the common inheritance of these dialects, 
no new elements have been created in the formation of 
their grammar. They have experienced various losses, 
and compensated them by a skilful application of what 
they carried away as their common heirloom. All, from 
Sanskrit to English, are but various forms of the same 
type, modifications of a language, once formed in Asia 
we know not and can hardly imagine how, yet a lan- 
guage the existence and reality of which has the full cer- 
tainty of matters resting on inductive evidence, although 
it goes back to times when historical chronology borders 
on the geological eras. 



85 



Arun Family. 




86 

Turanian The third family is the Turanian. It comprises all 

languages spoken in Asia or Europe not included under 
the Arian and Semitic families, with the exception per- 
haps of the Chinese and its dialects. This is, indeed, a 
very wide range; and the characteristic marks of union, 
ascertained for this immense variety of languages, are as 
yet very vague and general, if compared with the definite 
ties of relationship which severally unite the Semitic 
and the Arian. The common origin of some of these 
wide-spread idioms has indeed been proved with the same 
accuracy as that of Sanskrit and Greek, of Hebrew and 
Arabic: — and languages as widely distant as Hungarian 
and Finnish, have been traced back conclusively to one 
common source. Large divisions have thus been esta- 
blished, and five linguistic districts, the Tungusic, Mon- 
golic, Turkic, Samoiedic and Finnic, have been 
surveyed and laid down definitely as portions of one vast 
kingdom of speech. And after the convergence of these 
five divisions towards one central point has once been 
established, it will be difficult to exclude from the same 
system the other provinces of speech which lie scattered 
throughout on the map of Asia and Europe. 
Character of The absence of that close family likeness which holds 
Nomade the Arian and Semitic languages together, becomes it- 
self one of the distinguishing features of the Turanian 
dialects. They are Nomadic languages as contrasted 
with the Arian and Semitic dialects, which may be called 
State or political languages. In the gi-ammatical 
features of the latter class, we can discover the stamp 
of one powerful mind, once impressed on the floating 
materials of speech at the very beginning of their growth, 
and never to be obliterated again in the course of cen- 
turies. Like mighty empires founded by the genius of 
one man, in which his will is perpetuated as law through 
generations to come, the Semitic and Arian languages 
exhibit in all ages and countries a strict historical con- 
tinuity which makes the idioms of Moses and Mohammed, 
of Homer and Shakspeare, appear but slightly altered im- 
pressions of one original type. Most words and gram- 



matical forms in these two families seem to have been 
thrown out but once by the creative power of an indi- 
vidual mind; and the differences of the various Semitic 
and Arian languages, whether ancient or modern, were 
produced, not so much by losses and new creations, as 
by changes and corruptions which defaced in various 
ways the original design of these most primitive works 
of human art. This process of handing down a lan- 
guage through centuries without break or loss, is possible 
only among people whose history runs on in one main 
stream; and where religion, law, and poetry supply well 
defined borders which hem in on every side the current 
of language. Thus only can it be explained how, at 
the present day, the Lithuanian peasant expresses, "I am, 
esmi," with exactly the same root and the same termi- 
nation which the poet of the Veda used in India four 
thousand years ago; and how the numerals which we 
employ, are the same tokens which passed current among 
the common ancestors of the Teutons, Greeks, Romans, 
and Hindus. 

The case is widely different with the Turanian lan- 
guages. Firstly, the area over which they are spo- 
ken is much larger than that of the Arian and Semitic 
dialects. The latter occupy only what may be called the 
four Western Peninsulas of the great continent of the 
old world — India with Persia, Arabia, Asia-Minor, and 
Europe; and we have reason to suppose that even these 
countries were held by Turanian tribes previous to the 
immigration of the Arian and Semitic races. To our own 
times, by far the greater part of the primeval continent re- 
mains in possession of the descendants of Tur. But secondly, 
so far as history can reach back, no lasting nucleus of 
society or civilization has ever been formed in these vast 
Turanian wildernesses. Empires were no sooner founded 
there than they were scattered again like the sand-clouds 
of the desert; no laws, no songs, no stories outlived the 
age of their authors. How quickly language can change 
if thus left to itself without any standard, and kept up 
only by the daily wants of a savage life, may be seen 



88 



from the endless variety of idioms in America, or on the 
borders of India, Tibet, and China. There it has hap- 
pened that colonies from the same village, settled in 
neighbouring valleys, became mutually unintelligible after 
one or two generations. If then we bear in mind that 
thousands of years must have elapsed since the first se- 
paration of the Finnic and Mongolic races, that for a 
long time these races possessed nothing like a national 
or sacred literature, such as the Veda in India, or Homer 
in Greece, but that the scanty conversation of scattered 
tribes was the only safeguard for words once fixed to 
a certain meaning, and forms once coined with a certain 
value, we may understand why among the descendants 
of Tur we do not find the same clear traces of linguistic 
consanguinity as in the Arian and Semitic families. A 
different method must, therefore, be adopted to bring 
out the few remaining features that all Turanian dialects 
share in common, and which, though seemingly vague 
and general, it would be impossible to consider as the 
result of mere accident. The most necessary substan- 
tives, such as father, mother, daughter, son, have fre- 
quently been lost and replaced by synonymes in the dif- 
ferent branches of this family; yet common words are 
found, though not with the same consistency and regu- 
larity as in Semitic and Arian dialects. The Turanian 
numerals and pronouns point to a single original source, 
yet here again the tenacity of these Nomadic dialects 
cannot be compared with the tenacity of the political 
languages of Asia and Europe: — and common roots, dis- 
covered in the most distant Nomadic idioms, are mostly 
of a much more general form and character than the ra- 
dicals of the Arian and Semitic treasuries. 

But although we do not find, and cannot expect to 
find, in Nomadic languages those striking material coinci- 
dences by which the common origin of the Arian branches 
of speech has been proved, we are struck in them by a 
similarity of form such as it would be difficult to explain 
without the admission of common blood running in the veins 
of all Turanian dialects. This requires some explanation. 



89 



A reference to the latter stages of the Arian language, Morphoiogi- 

Cell coinci" 

may serve to illustrate what is meant by a similarity in dences of 
form between Turanian languages. The grammatical forms i.anguages. 
of the Arian languages were fixed but once. Each lan- 
guage, whether Greek or Sanskrit, received them ready 
made , and preserved them without feeling conscious of 
the manner in which originally they had been formed. 
No Roman probably was aware that in amamus, we 
love, mus was the remnant of a pronoun once attached 
to the root am a; as little as we suspect that the d in 
"I loved" was originally an auxiliary verb (to do), added 
to a root for the purpose of gi^dng it a past sense (I 
love-did). Most, if not all, of these grammatical forms 
had become typical before the common Arian speech was 
broken up into Sanskrit, Greek, and the rest. Now, if 
in place of adopting these grammatical forms, each lan- 
guage had produced them anew from its own materials, 
it is clear that the material parts of these new forms 
might have differed, while the principle on which they 
were composed might still have been the same. Let us 
take, for instance, the Future of the Romance languages, 
the formation of which was explained before. We can- 
not say that this Future j'aimer-ai, I-to-love-have , had 
become fixed and typical previous to the separation of 
the Romance dialects, that is to say, at the time when 
Latin was no longer classical Latin, but not resolved as 
yet into Italian, French, or Spanish. If this had been 
the case, the similarity between the Future in the six 
Romance languages, would probably be much greater than 
it is. Besides, we know for certain that in Proven9al 
at least the component parts of this new Future had not 
yet coalesced, but were understood as meaning "I have 
to love." Here then we find in the later remodelling of 
the Latin grammar, a coincidence in form analogous to 
the coincidences which unite the Turanian languages. 
Each Romance dialect took its own auxiliary verb "to 
have," under that peculiar form which it had reached 
after ceasing to be the Latin "habeo." Hence the mate- 
rials of which these Futures are formed cannot be said 



90 

to be the same, nor can they be treated as mere corrup- 
tions of one original type. Cantero was never chan- 
terai, nor canterei, a modification of canteraggio. 
Each Romance dialect formed its Future for itself, but 
all according to the same principle. And this applies to 
the Turanian languages. The materials employed by each 
for the production of grammatical forms are generally 
taken from its own resources; but the manner of the com- 
bination shows a character common to all. To use a 
homely illustration, the uniforms of the Arian languages 
are actually made of one and the same piece of cloth 
and by the same hands, while the uniformity of the Tu- 
ranian dialects lies not so much in the stuff, as in the 
cut and make of their dress. 

The system The most characteristic feature of the Nomadic or 

of Aggluti- 
nation. Turanian languages has been called 'Agglutination.' 

This means not only that in their grammars pronouns are 
glued to the verbs in order to form the conjugation, or 
prepositions to substantives in order to form declensions. 
That would not be characteristic of the Turanian lan- 
guages; for in Hebrew as well as in Sanskrit, conjuga- 
tions and declensions were originally formed on the same 
principle. What distinguishes the Turanian languages is, 
that in them the conjugation and declension can still be 
taken to pieces, and although the terminations have by 
no means retained their significative power as indepen- 
dent words, they are felt as modificatory syllables, and 
distinct from the words to which they are added. In 
the Arian languages the modifications of words, com- 
prised under declension and conjugation, were likewise 
originally expressed by agglutination. But the two com- 
ponent parts began soon to coalesce, so as to form but 
one word, liable in its turn to phonetic corruption, ren- 
dering it impossible after a time to decide which was the 
root and which the modificatory termination. The diffe- 
rence between a Turanian and an Arian language is some- 
what the same as between composing and reading. The 
compositor puts the s to the end of a word, and looks 
on the type s in his hand as producing the change of 



91 

pound into pounds; to the reader the s has no separate 
existence (except on scientific reflection); the whole word 
expresses to him the modified idea, and in his perception 
the same change is produced in penny and pence as in 
pound and pounds. 

The reason why, in the Turanian laneuasfes, the ter- integrity of 

•^ ' . . » & ' Turanian 

mination appears but slightly united to the body of a roots. 
word is this, — it was felt essential that the radical por- 
tion of each word should stand out in distinct relief, and 
never be obscured or absorbed, as happens so frequently 
in the later stages of political languages. The French 
dge^ for instance, has lost its whole material body, and 
is nothing but termination. Age, in Old French, was 
eage and edage. Edage is a corruption of aetaticum; 
aetaticum is a derivative of aetas; aetas an abbreviation 
of aevitas, and in aevum, ae only is the radical portion 
(the Sanskrit ay-us), containing the germ from which 
these various words derive their life and meaning. What 
trace of ae, ar aevum, or aevitas, remains in age? Tu- 
ranian languages cannot afford to retain such words as 
age in their Kving dictionaries. It is an indispensable 
requirement in every Nomadic language that it should be 
intelligible to many, though their intercourse be but scanty. 
It requires tradition, society, and literature to maintain 
forms which can no longer be analyzed at once, nor their 
formal elements separated from the base. 

The Arian verb, for instance, contains many forms 
in which the personal pronoun is no longer felt distinctly. 
And yet tradition, custom, and law, preserve the com- 
prehensibility of these veterans, and make us feel un- 
willing to part with them. But in the evershifting state 
of a Nomadic society no debased coin can be tolerated 
in language, no obscure legend accepted on trust. The 
metal must be pure, and the legend distinct; that the one 
may be weighed, and the other, if not deciphered, at 
least recognized as a well-known guarantee. 



92 

A Turanian might tolerate the Sanskrit, 
as-mi, a-si, as-ti, 's-mas, s-tha, 's-anti, 

I am, thou art, he is, we are, you are, they are; 
or even the Latin, 
's-um, e-s, es-t, 'su-mus, es-tis, 'sunt. 

In these instances, with a few exceptions, root and 
affix are as distinguishable as for instance in Turkish: 
bakar-im, bakar-sin, bakar, 

1 regard, thou regardest, he regards, 

bakar-iz, bakaj-siniz, bakar-lar. 

we regard, you regard, they regard. 

But a conjugation like the Hindustani, which is a modern 
Arian dialect, 

hun, hai, hai, hain, ho, hain, 

would not be compatible with the genius of the Turanian 
languages, because it would not answer the requirements 
of a Nomadic life. Turanian dialects exhibit either no 
terminational distinctions at all, as in Man^u, which is 
a Tungusic dialect; or a complete and intelligible system 
of affixes, as in the spoken dialect of Nyer/cinsk, equally 
of Tungusic descent. But a state of conjugation in which, 
through phonetic corruption, the suffix of the first person 
singular and plural, and of the third person plural are 
the same, where is no distinction between the second and 
third persons singular, and between the first and third 
persons plural, would necessarily lead in a Turanian dia- 
lect to the adoption of new and more expressive forms. 
New pronouns would have to be used to mark the per- 
sons, or some other expedient be resorted to for the 
same purpose. * 
Divergence But we must not dwell much longer on these general 

Dialects, features of the Turanian languages. All we desire to show 
is the fact that dialects whose grammar has not yet 

* For further particulars see the author's Letter to Chevalier 
Buusen, On the Classification of the Turanian Languages, London, 
18o4, in the first volume of Chev. Bunsen's Outlines of the Phi- 
losophy of Universal History. 



93 



settled down into a solid system, are liable to perpetual 
changes, and likely to diverge most rapidly if separated 
for any length of time. A Turanian retains, as it were, 
the consciousness of his grammar. The idea, for in- 
stance, which he connects with a plural is that of a noun 
followed by a syllable indicative of plurality; a passive 
is a verb followed by a syllable expressive of suffering. 
Now these determinative ideas may be expressed in 
various ways. But in one and the same clan, and during 
one period of time, one suffix would generally become 
popular, and be assigned to the expression of a single 
grammatical category, such as the plural, the passive, or 
the genitive. Thus, out of large mass of possible for- 
mations, a small number only would become customary 
and technical, leading finally to a scheme of declension 
and conjugation such as yve find in Turkish and Finnish. 
Different hordes, however, as tbey separated, would still 
feel themselves at liberty to repeat the same process; 
thus forming in their different idioms different phases of 
grammatical life, which, if confined to a single tribe, 
would naturally have disappeared without leaving any 
traces. 

In Nomadic languages, therefore, the sudden rise of 
a family or of a small association may produce an effect 
which, in political languages, can only be produced by 
the ascendency of a town or a province , a race or a 
religious sect. Where so little is fixed, the peculiarities 
of a rising family may change the whole surface of a 
language, and the accent of a successful Khan may leave 
its stamp on the grammar of all the tribes that foUow 
him. When one of the great Tatar chiefs proceeds on 
an expedition, he, as Marco Polo tells us in the fourteenth 
century, puts himself at the head of an army of a hun- 
dred thousand horse, and organizes them in the follo- 
wing manner. One officer he appoints to the command 
of every ten men, and others to command a hundred, a 
thousand, and ten thousand men respectively. Thus, ten 
of the officers commanding ten men take their orders 
from him who commands a hundred; of these, each ten 



94 



from him who commands a thousand; and each ten of 
these latter from him who commands ten thousand. By 
this arrangement each officer has only to attend to the 
management of ten men, or ten bodies of men, and the 
word of command is spread from the Khan to the hun- 
dred thousand common soldiers, after passing through 
not more than four mouths. This is characteristic lin- 
guistically as well as politically. 
Turanian If a laneuaffe is once fixed by literary works of a 

Languages ^ o o ./ ./ ^ 

approaching national character, change becomes difficult, nay, impos- 
type. sible without political convulsions. Where Nomadic na- 
tions rise to this stage of civilization and political or- 
ganization, their language, though Turanian in its gram- 
mar, may approach to the system of political languages, 
such as Sanskrit or Hebrew. This is indeed the case 
with the most advanced members of the Turanian fa- 
mily, the Hungarian and Finnish. Here some termina- 
tions have been so much worn out by continual use, 
and yet not replaced by new syllables, that on this point, 
the distinction between Turanian and Arian grammar ap- 
pears to vanish. Yet some characteristic Turian features 
are always retained: the root is never obscured; the 
determinative syllables are placed at the end; and the 
vowels never become so absolutely fixed for each syl- 
lable as in Sanskrit or Hebrew. On the contrary, there 
is a law of harmony, according to which the vowels of 
each word may be changed and modulated so as to har- 
monise with the key-note struck by its chief vowel. The 
vowels in Turkish, for instance, are divided into two 
classes, sharp and flat. If a verb contains a sharp 
vowel in its radical portion, the vowels of the termina- 
tions are all sharp, while the same terminations, if follo- 
wing a root with a flat vowel, modulate their own vo- 
wels into the flat key. Thus we have sev-mek, to love, 
but bak-mak, to regard, mek and mak being the termi- 
nation of the infinitive. Thus we say, ev-ler, the houses, 
but at-lar, the horses, ler andlar, being the termination 
of the plural. 

No Arian or Semitic language has preserved a simi- 



95 



lar freedom in the harmonic arrangement of its vowels, 
while traces of it have been found among the most dis- 
tant members of the Turanian family, as in Hungarian, 
Mongolian, Turkish, the Yakut, spoken in the North of 
Siberia, and in dialects spoken on the eastern frontiers 
of India. 

A number of words and roots, common to all Tura- 
nian languages, has been collected by Professor Schott 
in his Essay "On the Tataric Languages." 

It would carry us too far were we to attempt to pass Tungusic 
in review all the languages of the Turanian family. We 
shall only mention those with which the English Army 
is likely to be brought into more immediate contact. 
Hence we may dismiss the whole Tungusic branch, 
which extends from China northward to Siberia and west- 
ward to 113°, where the river Tunguska partly marks 
its frontier. Though Tungusic tribes in Siberia are under 
Russian sway, they are not likely to appear on the theatre 
of war. The other Tungusic tribes belonging to the 
Chinese empire, are known by the name of Man^u or 
Mandshu, a name taken after they had conquered China 
in 1644, and founded the present Imperial Dynasty. The 
name Tungus is derived from Donki,* which in their 
own language means "men," and by this the Tungusic 
tribes in Siberia call themselves. Other Tungusic tribes 
speak of themselves as Boye, which likewise has the 
original meaning of "people." 

The Mongolic branch also might be passed over for Mongoiic 
the present, as far as the original seats of the people 
who speak Mongolic dialects are concerned. These lie 
near the Lake Baikal and in the eastern parts of Siberia, 
where we find them as early as the ninth century after 
Christ. They were divided into three classes, the Mon- 

* Another explanation of this name has been suggested by the 
Hon. H. Stanley, H. M. Secretary of Legation at Athens. He derives 
it from tungus (v^iLb), a pig, the tribe of the pig, and remarks 
that this word is pronounced Domuz at Constantinople, but Don- 
guz or Tunguz in Anadol and Persia. 



96 

gols proper, the Buriats, and the Olot or Kalmiiks. 
iVingis-khan (ri27) united them into a nation and foun- 
ded the Mongolian Empire, which included however, not 
only Mongolic, but Tungusic and Turkic tribes. 
Oiigin of The name of Tatar soon became the terror of Asia and 

Tataric. Europe, and it was applied promiscuously to all the 
Nomadic warriors, whom Asia then poured forth over 
Europe. Originally Tatar was a name that belonged to 
the Mongolic races, but through their political ascendency 
in Asia after Alngis-khan, it became usual to call all the 
tribes w^hich stood under Mongolian sovereigns by the 
name of Tatar. In linguistic works Tataric is now used 
in two several senses. Following the example of writers 
of the middle ages, Tataric, like Scythian in Greek, has 
been fixed upon as the general term comprising all lan- 
guages spoken by the Nomadic tribes of Asia. Hence 
it is used sometimes in the same sense in which we use 
Turanian. Secondly , Tataric has become the name of 
that class of Turanian languages of which the Turkish 
is the most prominent member. While the Mongolic class 
— that which in fact has the greatest claims on the name 
of Tataric — is never thus called, it has become an 
almost universal custom to apply it to the third or Turkic 
branch of the Ural-Altaic division, and the races be- 
longing to this branch have in many instances themselves 
adopted this name. These Turkic, or as they were after- 
wards called, Tataric races, were settled on the northern 
side of the Caspian Sea, and on the Black Sea, and 
were known as Romanes, Penenegs, and Bulgars, when 
conquered by the Mongolic army of the son of Amgis- 
khan, who founded the Kap/iakian Empire, extending from 
the Dniestr to the Yemba, and the Kirgisian steppes. 
Russia for two centuries was under the sway of these 
Khans, known as the Khans of the Golden Horde. This 
empire was dissolved towards the end of the 1 5th cen- 
tury, and several smaller royalties rose out of its ruins. 
Among these Krim, Kasan, and Astrachan, were the most 
important. The princes of these empires still gloried in 
their descent from Aingiskhan, and had hence a right to 



9;^ 

the name of Mongols or Tatars. But their armies or 
subjects also, who were of Turkish blood, received the 
name of their princes; and their dialects continued to be 
called Tataric, even after the tribes by whom they were 
spoken had been brought under the Russian sceptre, and 
were no longer governed by Khans of Mongolic or Ta- 
taric origin. It would perhaps be desirable to use Turkic 
or Hunnic, instead of Tataric, when speaking of the third 
branch of the northern division of the Turanian family, 
though a change of terminology generally produces as 
much confusion as it remedies. The recollection of their 
non-Tataric, i. e. non-Mongolic origin, remains, it appears, 
among the so called Tatars of Kasan and Astrachan. If 
asked whether they are Tatars, they reply no; and they 
call their language Turki or Turuk, but not Tatari. Nay, 
they consider Tatar as a term ol abuse, synonymous with 
robber, evidently from a recollection that their ancestors 
had once been conquered and enslaved by Mongolic, that 
is, Tataric tribes. All this rests on the authority of Klap- 
roth, who during his stay in Russia, had great oppor- 
tunities of studying the languages spoken on all the fron- 
tiers of this half-Asiatic Empire. 

The conquests of the Mongols or the descendants of The Mon- 

ffolic COD' 

A'ingis-khan, were not confined however, to these Turkic quests. 
tribes. They conquered China in the east, where they 
founded the Mongolic dynasty of Yuan, and in the west, 
after subduing the Khalifs of Bagdad, and the Sultans of 
Iconium , they conquered Moscow , and devastated the 
greater part of Russia. In i240 they invaded Poland, 
in 1241 Silesia. Here they recoiled before the united 
armies of Germany, Poland, and Silesia. They retired 
into Moravia, and having exhausted this country, occupied 
Hungary. At that time they had to choose a new Khan, 
which could only be done at Karakorum, the old capital 
of their empire. Thither they withdrew to elect an em- 
peror to govern an empire which then extended from 
China to Poland, from India to Siberia. But a realm of 
such vast proportions could not be long held together, 
and towards the end of the \ 3th century, it broke up 



98 

into several independent states, all still under Mongolian 
princes, but no longer under one Khan of Khans. Thus, 
new independent Mongolic empires arose in China, Tur- 
kestan, Siberia, Southern Russia, and Persia. In 1360, 
the Mongolian dynasty was driven out of China; in the 
1 oth century they lost their hold on Russia. In Central 
Asia they rallied once more under Timur (1369), whose 
sway was again acknowledged from Karakorum to Persia 
and Anatolia. But in 1468, this empire also fell by its 
own weight, and for want of a powerful ruler like Z^ingis- 
khan or Timur. In Gagatai alone, the country extending 
from the Aral Lake to the Hindukush, between the rivers 
Oxus and Yaxartes, (Gihon and Sihon), and once governed 
by Gagatai, the son of Alngis-khan — the Mongolian 
dynasty maintained itself, and thence it was that Baber, 
a descendant of Timur, conquered India, and founded 
there a Mongolian dynasty, surviving up to our own times 
as the Great-Moguls of Delhi. Most Mogolic tribes 
are now under the sway of the nations whom they once 
had conquered, the Tungusic or Manyu sovereigns of China, 
the Russian Czars, and the Turkish Sultans. 
Mpngoiic The Mongolic language, although spoken (but not con 

tinuously) from China as far as the Volga, has given rise 
to but few dialects. Next to Tungusic, the Mongolic is 
the poorest language of the Turanian family, and the scan- 
tiness of grammatical terminations accounts for the fact 
that, as a language, it has remained very much unchanged. 
There is, however, a distinction between the language as 
spoken by the Eastern, Western, and Northern tribes, 
and incipient traces of grammatical life have lately been 
discovered by Castren, the great Swedish traveller and 
Turanian philologist, in the spoken dialect of the Buriats. 
In it the persons of the verb are distinguished by affixes, 
while according to the rules of Mongolic grammar, no 
other dialect distinguishes in the verb between amo, aiiirts, 
ama/. 

The Mongols who live in Europe have fixed their tents 
on each side of the Volga and along the coast of the 
Caspian Sea near Astrachan. Another colony is found 



Dialects. 



99 

south-east of Sembirsk. They belong to the Western branch, 
and are Olot or Kalmiiks, who left their seats on the 
Koko-nur , and entered Europe in 1 662. They proceeded 
from the clans Diirbet and Torgod, but most of the Tor- 
gods returned again in 1770, and their descendants are 
now scattered over the Kirgisian steppes. 

According to Koppen, in his Statistical journey in 
the country of the Don Cossacks (or Kosaks) (Peters- 
burg), 1852, the Kalmyks form two per cent of the inhabi- 
tants of that country, and nearly four per cent of the 
Cossack army. They are divided into Chutun's , Sotni's 
(Hundreds), and Uluss's; a Chutun consisting of 10 to 25 
Kibitkas or tents. In 1850 there were 3 Uluss's, with 
13 Sotni's and 5007 Kibitkas. 

Bronewsky, in his history of the Don army, says 
that the number of the Kalmyks in the country of the 
Don Cossacks, began to increase about 1699, and that 
in 1710 the Khan Ajuki undertook to send 10,000 Kal- 
myks, of the Diirbet clan, to the Don, According to 
Koppen, however, Ajuki only agreed to allow 10,000 Kal- 
myks to pass the winter of 1710 — 11, near the Manytsh 
and Ssal-rivers, as a safeguard against the inroads of the 
Don Cossacks who under Nekrassow, had escaped to the 
Kuban. They probably remained afterwards, and those who 
were baptized, have been allowed, since 1729, to enter the 
army on the same footing as the Cossacks. In 1 771 a great 
emigration took place, and many of the Kalmyks went 
back into their Trans-Uralian steppes; but as late as 1800, 
the Emperor Paul gave to the Kalmyk's of the Great 
and Little clans of Diirbet, who had remained or returned, 
all the land which they had occupied before 1771. It is 
here, between the Volga, the Sarpa, the Ssal, the Manytsh, 
the Kuma and the Caspian Sea, that they still lead their 
nomadic life. 

Much more important at the present moment are the Turkic La 

-^ _ _ guagcs. 

languages belonging to the third branch of the Turanian 
family, most prominent among which is the Turkish or 
Osmanli of Constantinople. The number of the Turkish 
inhabitants of European Turkey is indeed small. It is 



100 

generally stated at ^,000,000; but Safarik estimates the 
number of genuine Turks in Europe at not more than 
700,000, who rule over fifteen millions of people. The 
different Turkic dialects of which the Osmanli is one, 
occupy one of the largest linguistic areas, extending from 
the Lena and the Polar Sea down to the Adriatic. 

The three principal dialects of Turkish are, according 
to Beresin: 

1 . the ^agataic or Eastern dialect, spoken in Turkestan 
and known by some books printed at Kasan; 

2. the Northern dialect generally called Tataric and 
spoken in the KipAak and Siberia; 

3. the Western dialect, best known as the Osmanli, 
and spoken in the South-East of Europe and Asia minor. 

To these should be added, however, as independent 
branches the dialect of the Yakuts and that of the Ku- 
vashians. 
Turkish or The Turkish of Constantinople is so full of Persian 

and Arabic words, that a Turk from the country finds 
difficulty in understanding his master in town. Yet the 
real stock of the language has changed so little, that a 
Turk from Tomsk and Yeniseisk in Siberia is said to be 
able to understand the Turkish of Constantinople if spoken 
slowly and distinctly, and without admixture of Persian 
or Arabic words. A well-educated Turk may speak a 
whole sentence containing no one word of Turkic origin, 
and even particles and grammatical terminations, ever the 
last importations from one language into another, betray 
frequently a Persian or Arabic origin. Arabic as the 
language of Mahommed and the Koran would naturally find 
its way into the language of the people who adopted that 
religion. As to Persian, this w^as long the language of 
the most civilized and most advanced nation in Asia. In 
the first centuries of the Islam, Persians were the teachers 
of Arabs, and among the early Arabic authors, many 
names are found of Persian origin. Persian literature again 
was the only source whence, in the East, a taste for the 
more refined branches of poetry could be satisfied, whether 
through originals or by the medium of translations. In 



101 

fact, Persian was for a long time the French of Asia, 
and it is still used there as the language of diplomatic 
correspondence. Hence many terms connected with literary 
subjects, or referring to other occupations of a society 
more advanced in civilization, are of Persian, t. e. of Arian 
origin. A knowledge of Persian and Arabic is therefore 
invaluable to the student of Turkish. 

A list of all Turkic dialects , arranged under three Ancient Seat 

.... o 1 ^T 1 1 ,-^ . . ^^ Turkic 

divisions, bouth-eastern, JNorthern, and Western, is given Tribes. 
at the end of this chapter according to Beresin. 

The most ancient name by which the Turkic tribes 
of Central Asia were known to the Chinese, was Hiung-nu. 
These Hiung-nu founded an empire (206 b. c.) comprising 
a large portion of Asia, west of China. Engaged in fre- 
quent wars with the Chinese, they were defeated at last 
in the middle of the first century after Christ. Thereupon 
they divided into a northern and southern empire; and 
after the southern Hiung-nu had become subjects of China, 
they attacked the northern Hiung-nu together with the 
Chinese, "^nd, driving them out of their seats between the 
rivers Amur and Selenga, and the Altai-mountains, west- 
ward, they gave the first impulse to the inroads of the 
Barbarians into Europe. In the beginning of the third 
century, Mongolic and Tungusic tribes, who had filled 
the seats of the Northern Hiung-nu, had grown so pov^^erful 
as to attack the Southern Hiung-nu and drive them from 
their territories. This occasioned a second migration of 
Asiatic tribes towards the west. 

Another name by which the Chinese designate these 
Hiung-nu or Turkish tribes, is Tukiu. Tukiu is supposed 
to be identical with Turk, and although the tribe to which 
this name was given was originally but small, it began to 
spread in the sixth century from the Altai to the Caspian 
Sea, and it was probably to them that in 569 the Emperor 
Justinian sent an ambassador in the person of Semarchos. 
The empire of the Tu-kiu was destroyed in the eighth 
century, by the 'Hui-'he (Chinese Kao-ke). This tribe, 
equally of Turkic origin , maintained itself for about a 
century, and was then conquered by the Chinese and driven 



102 

back from the northern borders of China. Part of the 
'Hui-'he occupied Tangut, and after a second defeat by the 
Mongolians in 1257, the remnant proceeded still further 
west, and joined the Uigurs, whose tents were pitched 
near the towns of Turfan, Kasgar, 'Hamil, and Aksu. 

These facts, gleaned chiefly from Chinese historians, 
show from the very earliest times the westward tendency of 
the Turkish nations. In 568 Turkic tribes occupied the 
country between the Volga and the sea of Azov, and 
numerous reinforcements have since strengthened their po- 
sition in those parts. 
Turkmans. The northern part of Persia, west of the Caspian Sea, 

Armenia, the south of Georgia, 8irwan, and Dagestan, 
harbour a Turkic population , known by the general name 
of Turkman or Kisil-bas (Red-caps). They are No- 
madic robbers, and their arrival in these countries dates 
from the eleventh and twelfth centuries. ( 

East of the Caspian Sea the Turkman tribes are under 
command of the Usbek-Khans of Khiva, Fergana and 
Bukhara. They call themselves, however, not subjects 
but guests of these Khans. Still more to the East the 
Turkmans are under Chinese sovereignty, and in the south- 
west they reach as far as Khorasan and the adjoining 
provinces of Persia. 

Usbeks. The Usbeks, descendants of the 'Huy-*^he and Uigurs. 

and originally settled in the neighbourhood of the toAvns 
of 'Hoten, Kasgar, Turfan, and 'Hamil, crossed the Yaxartes 
in the sixteenth century, and after several successful cam- 
paigns gained possession of Balkh, Kharism (Khiva), 
Bukhara, and Ferganah, In the latter country and in 
Balkh, they have become agricultural; but generally their 
life is nomadic, and too warlike to be called pastoral. 

Nogais. Another Turkic tribe are the Nogai, west of the 

Caspian, and also north of the Black Sea. To the be- 
ginning of the seventeenth century they lived northeast of 
the Caspian, and the steppes on the left of the Irtis bore 
their name. Pressed by the Kalmiiks, a Mongolic tribe, 
the Nogais advanced westward as far as Astrachan. Pe- 
ter I, transferred thein thence to the north of the Cau- 



Bazianes. 



103 



casian mountains , where they still graze their flocks on 
the shores of the Kuban and the Kuma. Their chief clans 
are the Kasbulat, KipAak, Mangut , Yedisan , G'ambulat, 
Yedikul and Naurus; between the rivers 'Hots and Laba, 
the Mansur-ogli, and between the Terek and Kuma, the 
Kara-Nogai, Yedikul, Yedisan, and G'ambulat. One horde, 
that of Kundur, remained on the Volga, subject to the 
Kalmiiks. 

Another tribe of Turkic origin in the Caucasus are 
the Bazianes. They now live near the sources of the 
Kuban, but before the fifteenth century within the town 
Ma^ari, on the Kuma. 

A third Turkish tribe in the Caucasus are the Kumiiks Kamuks 
on the rivers Sun^a, Aksai, and Koisu: now^ subjects of 
Russia though under native princes. 

A grammar of the Turkic or as they are more commonly 
called, Tataric dialects, as spoken in the Caucasus, was 
published at Tiflis in 1848 by Makarov/. It is written 
in Russian. An account of it is given by Professor Boeht- 
lingk in the Melanges Asiatiques, i., p. 127. It comprises 
the dialects of the Nogais, the Kumiiks of Aderbif/an, 
with others: — showing where they deviate in pronunciation 
or grammatical peculiarities from the general rules of Tur- 
kish or Tataric grammar. 

The southern portion of the Altaic mountains has long Bac^kiis 
been inhabited by the Baskirs, a race considerably mixed 
with Mongolic blood, savage and ignorant, subjects of 
Russia, and Mahommedans by faith. Their land is divided 
into four Roads, called the Roads of Siberia, that of 
Kasan, of Nogai, and of Osa, a place on the Kama. 
Among the Baskirs, and in villages near Ufa, is now sett- 
led a Turkic tribe, the MesAeraks who formerly lived 
near the Volga. 

The tribes near the Lake of Aral are called Kara- 
Kalpak. They are subject partly to Russia, partly to 
the Khans of Khiva. 

The Turks of Siberia, commonly celled Tatars, are lurk^^ 
partly original settlers, who crossed the Ural, and founded 
the Khanat of Sibir, partly later colonists. Their chief 



Silieria. 



104 

towns are Tobolsk, Yeniseisk, and Tomsk. Separate tribes 
are the Uran hat on the Kulym , and the Barabas in the 
steppes between the Irtis and the Ob. 

The dialects of these Siberian Turks are considerably 
intermingled with foreign words, taken from Mongolic, 
Samoiedic or Russian sources. Still they resemble one 
another closely in all that belongs to the original stock 
of the language. 

Yakuts. In the north-east of Asia, on both sides of the river 

Lena, the Yakuts form the most remote link in the Turkic 
chain of languages. Their male population has lately risen 
to 100,000, while in 1795 it amounted only to 50,066. 
The Russians became first acquainted with them in 1620. 
They call themselves Sakha, and are mostly heathen, 
though Christianity is gaining ground among them. Ac- 
cording to their traditions, their ancestors lived for a long 
time in company wdth Mongolic tribes, and traces of this 
can still be discovered in their language. Attacked by 
their neighbours, they built rafts and floated down the 
river Lena, where they settled in the neighbourhood of 
what is now Yakutzk. Their original seats seem to have 
been north-west of Lake Baikal. Their language has pre- 
served the Turkic type more completely than any other 
dialect of this third Turanian class. Separated from the 
common stock at an early time, and removed from the 
disturbing influences to which the other dialects were ex- 
posed, whether in war or in peace, the Yakutian has pre- 
served so many primitive features of Turkic grammar, that 
even now it may be used as a key to the grammatical 
forms of the Osmanli and other more cultivated dialects. 

Kirgis. Southern Siberia is the mother-country of the Kirgis, 

one of the most numerous tribes of Turkic origin. The 
Kirgis lived originally between the Ob and Yenisei, where 
Mongolic tribes settled among them. At the beginning of 
the seventeenth century the Russians became acquainted 
with the Eastern Kirgis, then living along the Yenisei. 
In 1606 they had become tributary to Russia, and after 
several wars With two neighbouring tribes, were driven 
more and more south-westAvard , till they left Siberia al- 



105 

together at the beginning of the eighteenth century. They 
now live at Burnt, in Chinese Turkestan, together with 
the Kirgis of the "Great Horde", near the town of Kas- 
gar, north as far as the Irtis. 

Another tribe is that of the Western Kirgis, or 
Kirgis-Kasak, who are partly independent, partly tri- 
butary to Russia and China. 

Of what are called the three Kirgis Hordes, from the 
Caspian Sea East as far as Lake Tenghiz, the Small Horde 
is fixed in the West, between the rivers Yemba and Ural; 
the Great Horde in the East; while the most powerful 
occupies the centre between the Sarasu and Yemba, and 
is called the Middle Horde. Since 1819 the Great 
Horde has been subject to Russia. Other Kirgis tribes, 
though nominally subject to Russia, are really her most 
dangerous enemies. 

The Turks of Asia Minor and Syria came from Kho- Turks of 
rasan and Eastern Persia, and are Turkman, or remnants and Europe. 
of the Sel^uks, the rulers of Persia during the Middle 
Ages. The Osmanli, Avhom we are accustomed to call 
Turks par excellence, and who form the ruling por- 
tion of the Turkish empire , must be traced to the same 
source. They are now scattered over the whole Turkish 
empire in Europe, Asia and Africa, and their number 
amounts to between eleven and twelve millions. They 
form the landed gentry, the aristocracy, and bureaucracy 
of Turkey, and their language, the Osmanli, is spoken by 
persons of rank and education, and by all government 
authorities in Syria, in Egypt, at Tunis, and at Tripoli. 
In the southern provinces of Asiatic Russia, along the 
borders of the Caspian, and through the whole of Tur- 
kestan, it is the language of the people. It is heard even 
at the Court of Teheran, and understood by official per- 
sonages in Persia. 

The rise of this powerful tribe of Osman , and the Rise of the 
spreading of that Turkish dialect which is now empha- 
tically called the Turkish, are matters of historical no- 
toriety. We need not search for evidence in Chinese 
annals, or try to discover analogies between names that a 



06 



Greek or an Arabic writer may by ciiance have heard 
and handed down to us, and which some of these tribes 
have preserved to the present day. The ancestors of the 
Osman Turks are men as well known to European histo- 
rians as Charlemagne or Alfred. It was in the year 1224 
that Soliman-shah and his tribe, pressed by Mongo- 
lians, left Khorasan and pushed westward into Syria, Ar- 
menia, and Asia Minor. Soliman's son, Ertoghrul, took 
service under Aladdin, the Sel^-uk-Snltan of Iconium (Ni- 
caea), and after several successful campaigns against Greeks 
and Mongolians, received part of Phrygia as his own, 
and there founded what was afterwards to become the 
basis of the Osmanic empire. During the last years of 
the thirteenth century the Sultans of Iconium lost their 
power, and their former vassals became independent so- 
vereigns. Osman, after taking his share of the spoil in 
Asia, advanced through the Olympic passes into Bithynia 
and was successful against the armies of the Emperors 
of Byzantium: — and Osman became henceforth the national 
name of his people. His son, Or khan, whose capital 
was Prusa (Bursa), after conquering Nicomedia (1327), 
and Nicaea (1330), threatened the Hellespont. He took 
the title of Padishah, and his court was called the "High 
Porte." His son, S oilman, crossed the Hellespont (1357), 
and took possession of Gallipoli and Sestos. He thus 
became master of the Dardanelles. Murad I. took Adrian- 
ople in 1362, made it his capital, conquered Macedonia, 
and after a severe struggle, overthrew the united forces 
of the Slavonic races, south of the Danube, the Bulga- 
rians, Servians, and Kroatians, in the battle of Kossova- 
polye (1389). He fell himself, but his successor Baya- 
zeth, followed his course, took Thessaly, passed Ther- 
mopylae, and devastated the Peloponnesus. The Emperor 
of Germany, Sigismund, who advanced at the head of an 
army, composed of French, German and Slavonic soldiers, 
was defeated by Bayazeth on the Danube in the battle 
of Nicopolis, 1399. Bayazeth took Bosnia, and would 
have taken Constantinople, had not the same Mongolians, 
who in 1244 drove the first Turkish tribes westward into 



107 



Persia, threatened again their newly acquired possessions. 
Timur had grasped the reins , fallen from the hands 
of Hingis-khan: Bayazeth was compelled to meet him, 
and suffered defeat (1402) in the battle of Angora (An- 
kyra) in Galatia. 

Europa now had respite, but not long; Timur died, 
and with him his empire fell to pieces, while the Osmanic 
army rallied again under Mahomet I. (1413), and re-at- 
tained its former power under Marad II. (1421). Suc- 
cessful in Asia, Murad sent his armies back to the Danube, 
and after long continued campaigns, and powerful resistance 
from the Hungarians and Slaves under Hunyad, he at last 
gained two decisive victories; Varna in 1444, and Kossova 
in 1 4 '1 8. Constantinople could no longer be held, and 
the Pope endeavoured in vain to rouse the chivalry of 
Western Europe to a crusade against the Turks, Ma- 
homet II, succeeded in 1451, and on the 29th of May, 
1453, Constantinople, after a valiant resistance, fell and 
became the capital of the Turkish empire. 

Four hundred years have since elapsed , and it is now 
no longer the power, but the weakness of the Turks, 
which forms the terror of Europe. The vacuum which 
was created by the decay of the Byzantine empire, in the 
political system of Europe, filled for a time by the Turks, 
begins to make itself felt again, and concomitant pressure 
from all sides has brought on the events we are called 
to witness. 

It is no easy matter to acquire a perfect knowledge 
of Turkish. In order to speak, to read, and to write it 
with ease, elegance, and correctness, we must in reality 
learn three languages, Arabic, Persian, and Turkish, each 
built on a different system of grammar, the Arabic be- 
longing to the Semitic, the Persian to the Arian, and the 
Turkish to the Turanian family of speech. But few, even 
of the most learned Turks, command this full knowledge 
of their language, no more perhaps than in England pos- 
sess a knowledge of Latin, Anglo-Saxon, and Norman- 
French. Divested of its foreign elements, few languages 



108 

are so easy, so intelligible, and I might almost say, so 
amusing as Turkish. It is a real pleasure to read the 
Turkish grammar, even without the wish to acquire it 
practically. The ingenious manner in which the nu- 
merous grammatical forms are brought out, the regula- 
rity which pervades the system of declension and con- 
jugation, the transparency and intelligibility of the whole 
structure must strike all who have a sense for that won- 
derful power of the human mind which has displayed 
itself in language. Given so small a number of graphic 
and demonstrative roots as would not suffice to express 
the commonest wants of human beings: — to produce an 
instrument that shall render the faintest shades of feeling 
and thought; — given a vague infinitive or a stern im- 
perative: — to derive from it such moods as an optative 
or subjunctive, and such tenses as an Aorist or Paulo- 
post Future; — given incoherent utterances: — to arrange 
them into a system where all is uniform and regular, all 
combined and harmonious — such is the work of the 
human mind which we see realized in "language." But 
in most languages nothing of this early process remains 
visible, and we hardly know whether to call them the 
work of nature or of art. They stand before us like so- 
lid rocks, and the microscope of the philologist alone can 
reveal the remains of organic life of which they are com- 
posed. 

But in the grammar of the Turkic languages we have 
before us a language of perfectly transparent structure, 
and a grammar whose inner workings we can study, as 
if watching the building of cells in a crystal beehive. An 
eminent Orientalist remarked "we might imagine Turkish 
to be the result of the deliberations of some eminent so- 
ciety of learned men;" but no such society could have 
devised what the mind of man produced, left to itself in 
the steppes of Tatary, and guided by its innate laws, or 
by an instinctive power as wonderful as any within the 
realm of nature. 

Turkish Let US examine a few forms. "To love", in the most 

conjugation. 

general sense of the word, or love, as a root, is in 



Turkish 
riiTiiniriDr. 



09 



Turkish sev. This does not as yet mean "to love", which 
is sevmek, or "love" as a substantive, which is sevgu, 
or sevi; but it only expresses the general quality of 
loving in the abstract. This root, as we remarked be- 
fore, can never be touched. Whatever syllables may be 
added for the modification of its meaning, the root itself 
must stand out in full prominence like a pearl set in dia- 
monds. It must never be changed or broken, assimilated 
or modified, as in the English I fall, I fell, I take, I took, 
I think, I thought, and many similar. With this one re- 
striction, however, we are free to treat it at pleasure. 

Let us suppose we possessed nothing like our conjuga- 
tion, but had to express such ideas as I love, thou lovest, 
and the rest, for the first time arising in the mind. No- 
thing would seem more natural now than to form an ad- 
jective or a participle, meaning "loving", and then add 
the different pronouns, as I loving, thou loving, &c. 
Exactly this the Turks have done. We need not inquire 
at present how they produced what we call a participle. 
It was a task by no means facile as we now conceive it, 
nor is it possible in every case to trace a process essen- 
tially complicated. In Turkish, one participle, correspon- 
ding to ours in ing, is formed by er. Sev-f-er, would, 
therefore, mean lov-f-er or lov 4 ing. Thou in Turkish 
is sen, and as all modificatory syllables are placed at 
the end of the root, we get sev-er-sen, thou lovest. 
You in Turkish is siz; hence sev-er-siz, you love. In 
these cases the pronouns and the terminations of the verb 
coincide exactly. In other persons the coincidences are 
less complete, because the pronominal terminations have 
sometimes been modified, or, as in the third person sin- 
gular, sever, dropped altogether as unnecessary. A re- 
ference to other cognate languages, however, where either 
the terminations or the pronouns themselves have main- 
tained a more primitive form, enables us to say that in 
the original Turkic verb, all persons of the present were 
formed by means of pronouns appended to this participle 
sever. Instead of "I love, thou lovest, he loves", the 
Tataric grammarian says, "lover -I, lover -thou, lover," 



uo 



But these personal terminations are not the same in 
the imperfect as in the present. 

PRESENT. IMPERFECT. 

Sev-er-im I love sev-di-m , I loved. 

Sev-er-sen sev-di-n*. 

Sev-er sev-di. 

Sev-er-iz sev-di-k (miz). 

Sev-er-siz sev-di-n-iz. 

Sev-er-ler sev-di-ler. 

We need not inquire as yet into the origin of the di, 
added to form the imperfect; but it should be stated that 
in the first person plural of the imperfect, a various reading 
occurs in other Turkic dialects, and that miz is used 
there instead of k. Now, looking at these terminations 
m, n% i, miz, n-iz, and ler, we find that they are exactly 
the same as the possessive pronouns used after nouns. 
As in some Italian dialects we have fratel-mio, my brother, 
and as in Hebrew we can say El-i, God (of) I, i. e. my 
God, the Turkic languages form the phrases "my house, 
thy house, his house", by possessive pronouns appended 
to substantives. A Turk says, — 



Baba, 


father. 


baba-m, 


my father. 


Agha, 


lord, 


agha-n-. 


thy lord. 


El, 


hand. 


el-i. 


his hand. 


O'/iiu, 


son, 


oVzlu-muz, 


our son. 


Ana, 


mother. 


ana-n-iz. 


your mother. 


Kitab, 


book. 


kitab-Ieri, 


their book. 



We may hence infer that in the imperfect these pro- 
nominal terminations were originally taken in a possessive 
sense, and that, therefore, what remains after the personal 
terminations are removed, sev-di, was never an adjective 
or a participle, like sev-er, but must have been originally a 
substantive capable of receiving terminal possessive pro- 
nouns; that is, the idea originally expressed by the imperfect 
could not have been "loving-I", but "love of me." 

How then, could this convey the idea of a past tense as 
contrasted with the present? Let us look to our own 



1 1 1 



language. If desirous to express the perfect, we say, I 
have loved, j'ai aime. This "I have", meant originally, 
I possess, and in Latin "amicus quern amatum habeo ", 
signified in fact a friend whom I hold dear, — not as yet, 
whom I have loved. In the course of time, however, 
these phrases, "I have said, I have loved", took the sense 
of the perfect, and of time past — and not unnaturally, 
inasmuch as what I hold, or have done, is done; — done, 
as we say, and past. In place of an auxiliary possessive 
verb, the Turkic language uses an auxiliary possessive 
pronoun to the same effect. "Paying belonging to me", 
equals "I have paid"; in either case a phrase originally 
possessive, took a temporal signification, and became a 
past or perfect tense. This, however, is the very ana- 
tomy of grammar, and when a Turk says "sevdim" he 
is, of course, as unconscious of its literal force, "loving 
belonging to me", as of the circulation of his blood. 
Leaving, therefore, these analytical niceties, and the earlier 
stage of the Turanian speech, Ave proceed to a rapid 
glance at some of its further developments. 

The most ingenious part of Turkish is undoubtedly 
the verb. Like Greek and Sanskrit, it exhibits a variety 
of moods and tenses, sufficient to express the nicest sha- 
des of doubt, of surmise, of hope, and supposition. In 
all these forms the root remains intact, and sounds like 
a key-note through all the various modulations produced 
by the changes of person, number, mood, and time. But 
there is one feature so peculiar to the Turkish verb, that 
no analogy can be found in any of the Arian languages 
— the power of producing new roots by the mere addition 
of certain letters, which give to every verb a negative, 
or causative, or reflexive, or reciprocal meaning. 

Sev-mek, for instance, as a simple root, means to 
love. By adding in, we obtain a reflexive verb, sev-in- 
mek, which means to love oneself, or rather, to rejoice, 
to be happy. This may now be conjugated through all 
moods and tenses, sevin being in every respect equal to 
a new root. By adding i s h we form a reciprocal verb, 
sev-ish-mek, to love one another. 






112 



To each of these three forms a causative sense may 
be imparted by the addition of the syllable dir. Thus, 

I. sev-mek, to love, becomes iv, sev-dir-mek, to 

cause to love. 
II. sev-in-mek, to rejoice, becomes v, sev-in-dir- 

mek, to cause to rejoice, 
III. sev-ish-mek, to love one another, becomes vi, sev- 
ish-dir-mek, to cause ourselves to love one an- 
other. 
Each of these six forms may again be turned into a 
passive by the addition of il. Thus, 

I. sev-mek, to love, becomes vii, sev-il-mek, to be 

loved. 
II. sev-in-mek, to rejoice, becomes viii, sev-in-il- 
mek, to be rejoiced at. 

III. sev-ish-mek, to love one another, becomes ix, sev- 
ish-il-mek, not translatable. 

IV. sev-dir-mek, to cause one to love, becomes ix, sev- 
dir-il-mek, to be brought to love. 

V. sev-in-dir-mek, to cause to rejoice, becomes xi, 

sev-in-dir-il-mek, to be made to rejoice. 
VI. sev-ish-dir-mek, to cause to love one another, 
becomes xii, sev-ish-dir-il-mek, to be brought 
to love one another. 

This, however, is by no means the whole verbal con- 
tingent at the command of a Turkish grammarian. Every 
one of these twelve secondary or tertiary roots may again 
be turned into a negative by the mere addition of me. 
Thus, sev-mek, to love, becomes sev-me-mek, not 
to love. And if it is necessary to express the impossi- 
bility of loving, the Turk has a new root at hand to 
convey even that idea. Thus while sev-me-mek denies 
only the fact of loving, sev-eme-mek, denies its pos- 
sibility , and means not to be able to love. By the ad- 
dition of these two modificatory syllables, the number 
of derivative roots is at once raised to thirty-six. Thus, 

I. sev-mek, to love, becomes xiii, sev-me-mek, not 
to love. 



113 



II. sev-in-mek, to rejoice, becomes xiv, sev-in-me- 
mek, not to rejoice. 

III. sev-ish-mek , to love one another, becomes xv, 
sev-ish-me-raek, not to love one another. 

IV. sev-dir-mek, to cause to love, becomes xvi, sev- 
dir-me-mek, not to cause one to love. 

V. sev-in-dir-mek, to cause to rejoice, becomes xvii, 
sev-in-dir-me-mek, not to cause one to rejoice. 

VI. sev-ish-dir-mek, to cause ourselves to love one 
another, becomes xviii, sev-ish-dir-me-mek, not 
to cause ourselves to love one another. 

VII. sev-il-mek, to be loved, becomes xix, sev-il-me- 
mek, not to be loved. 

VIII. sev-in-il-mek, to be rejoiced at, becomes xx, sev- 

in-il-me-mek, not to be the object of rejoicing. 
IX. sev-ish-il-mek, if it was used , would become xxi, 

sev-is-il-me-mek; neither form being translatable. 
X. sev-dir-il-mek, to be brought to love, becomes 

xxii, scv-dir-il-me-mek, not to be brought to 

love. 
XI. sev-in-dir-mek, to be made to rejoice, becomes 

xxiii, sev-in-dir-il-me-mek, not to be made to 

rejoice. 
XII. sev-ish-dir-il-mek, to be brought to love one 

another, becomes xxiv, sev-ish- dir-il-me-mek, 

not to be brought to love one another. 

Some of these forms are of course of rare occurrence, 
and with many verbs these derivative roots, though pos- 
sible grammatically, would be logically impossible. Even 
a verb like 'to love', perhaps the most pliant of all, 
resists some of the modifications to which a Turkish gram- 
marian is fain to subject it. It is clear, however, that 
wherever a negation can be formed, the idea of impos- 
sibility also can be superadded, so that by substituting 
erne for me, we should raise the number of derivative 
roots to thirty-six. The very last of these, xxxvi, sev- 
ish-dir-il-eme-mek would be perfectly intelligible, and 
might be used, for instance, at the present moment if, in 

8 



1U 



speaking of the Sultan and the Czar, we wished to say, 
that it was impossible that they should be brought to love 
one another. 

Our review of the languages of the seat of war in the 
East might here be closed , because the next branch of 
the Turanian family, the Finnic, carries us up so far to 
the north of Europe and Asia, that we may hope no 
European army will have to march there. But while the 
army in the South will probably never exchange words 
with a Finn, many of the inhabitants of the Baltic coast, 
with whom the fleets will have probably to make acquain- 
tance belong to this division of the Turanian race. And 
indeed so wide and wayward have been the migrations 
of this family, that its scattered members — Magyars or 
Hungarians on the Middle Danube, and Finns and Lapps 
on the Northern Gulf, touch either extreme on the vast 
line of the allied operations. We shall therefore add a 
few words on these nations and their early wanderings. 

Finnic It is -generally supposed that the original seat of the 

Finnic tribes was in the Ural mountains, and their lan- 
guages have been therefore called Uralic. From this 
centre they spread east and west: and southward in an- 
cient times, even to the Black Sea, where Finnic tribes, 
together with Mongolic and Turkic, were probably known 
to the Greeks under the comprehensive and convenient 
name of Scythians. As we possess no literary documents 
of any of these Nomadic nations, it is impossible to say, 
even where Greek writers have preserved their barbarous 
names, to what branch of the vast Turanian family they 
belonged. Their habits were probably identical before 
the Christian era, during the Middle Ages, and at the 
present day. One tribe takes possession of a tract and 
retains it perhaps for several generations, giving its 
name to the meadows where it tends its flocks, and to 
the rivers where the horses are watered. If the country 
be fertile, it will attract the eye of other tribes; wars 
begin, and if resistance be hopeless, hundreds of families 
fly from their paternal pastures, to migrate perhaps for 



115 

generations, — for migration they find a more natural life 
than permanent habitation, — and after a time we may 
rediscover their names a thousand miles distant. Or two 
tribes will carry on their warfare for ages, till with re- 
duced numbers both have perhaps to make common cause 
against some new enemy. 

During these continued struggles their languages lose as 
many words, perhaps, as men are killed on the field of battle. 
Some words (we might say) go over like deserters — others 
are made prisoners, and exchanged again during times of 
peace. Besides, there are parleys and challenges, and at 
last a dialect is produced which may very properly be 
called a language of the camp, — (Urdu-zeban, camp- 
language, is the proper name of Hindustani, formed in 
the armies of the Mogol-emperors) — but where it is 
difficult for the philologist to arrange the living and to 
number the slain, unless some salient points of grammar 
have been preserved throughout the melee. We saw how 
a number of tribes may be at times suddenly gathered 
by the command of a Alngis-khan or Timur, like billows 
hea\dng and swelling at the call of a thunderstorm. One 
such wave rolling on from Karakorum to Liegnitz may 
sweep away all the sheepfolds and landmarks of centuries, 
and when the storm is over, a thin crust will, as after a 
flood, remain, concealing the underlying stratum of people 
and languages. Geologists tell us that beneath a layer 
of gravel, granite rocks are often concealed. And thus 
when we set aside the family name of Tatar, conferred 
by the princes of the house of A'ingis-khan on the tribes 
of the Black Sea and Siberia, we recognize the tribes 
themselves as indubitably and purely Turkic. 

On the evidence of language, the Finnic stock is di- Four Divi- 

•j J • . i- 1. u ^ ^ ' sions oftlif 

vided mto tour branches , Finnic 



Branch. 



The Audic, 
The Bulgaric, 
The Permic, 
The Ugric. 



116 

The A'udic The A'udic branch comprises the Finnic of the Baltic 

I ranch. 

coasts. The name is derived from ^ud (Tchud) originally 
applied by the Russians to the Finnic nations in the 
north-west of Russia. Afterwards it took a more general 
sense, and was used almost synonymously with Scythian 
for all the tribes of Central and Northern Asia. The 
Tiie Finns. Finns, properly so called, or as they call themselves 
Suomalamen, i. e., inhabitants of fens, are settled in the 
provinces of Finland (formerly belonging to Sweden, but 
since 1809 annexed to Russia), and in parts of the go- 
vernments of Archangel and Olonetz. Their number is 
1,521,515. The Finns are governed by Russia with some 
moderation, and their country, though apparently more 
swamp than soil, yields an annual surplus of revenue. 
The Finns are the most advanced of their whole family, 
and are, the Magyars excepted, the only Finnic race that 
can claim a station among the civilized and civilizing na- 
tions of the world. Their literature and, above all, their 
popular poetry bears witness to a high intellectual deve- 
lopment in times which we may call mythical, and in 
places more favourable to the glow of poetical feelings 
than their present abode, the last refuge that Europe could 
afford them. These songs still live among the poorest, 
recorded by oral tradition alone, and preserving all the 
features of a perfect metre and of a more ancient lan- 
guage. A national feeling has lately arisen amongst the 
Finns, in spite of Russian supremacy, and the labours of 
Sjogren, Lonnrot, Castren, and Kellgren, receiving hence 
a powerful impulse, have produced results truly sur- 
prising. From the mouths of the aged an epic poem has 
been collected equalling the Iliad in length and completeness, 
nay, if we can forget for a moment all that we in our youth 
learned to call beautiful, of a beauty essentially similar. A 
Finn is not a Greek, and Wainamoinen was not a Homer. 
But if the poet may take his colours from that nature by 
which he is surrounded, if he may depict the men with 
whom he lives, "Kalewala" possesses merits not dissi- 
milar from the Iliad, and will claim its place as the fifth 
national epic of the world, side by side with the Ionian 



M7 



songs, with the Mahabharata, the Shah-nameh, and the 
Nibelunge. This early literary cultivation has not been 
without a powerful influence on the language. It has 
imparted permanency to its form and a traditional character 
to its words, so that at first sight we might almost doubt 
whether the grammar of this language had not left the 
agglutinative stage, and entered into the current of in- 
flection, with Greek or Sanskrit. The agglutinative type, 
however, yet remains, and its grammar shows a luxuriance 
of grammatical combination second only to Turkish and 
Hungarian. Like Turkish it observes the ''harmony of 
vowels", a feature peculiar to Turanian languages, as 
explained before. 

Karelian and Tavastian are dialectical varieties of 
Finnish. 

The present civilization of Finnland, its schools and 
university (Helsingfors), its literature and government, are 
rather of Teutonic than of indigenous growth. But traces 
of the Finnic character are visible amongst the existing 
race. A tone of sad resignation, broken by fantastic 
wildness, runs through their literature, and meditativeness 
has almost become their national character. 

The Esths or Esthonians, neighbouring on the Finns, The Estho- 
speak a language closely allied to the Finnish. It is di- 
vided into the dialects of Dorpat (in Livonia) and Reval. 
Except some popular songs it is almost without literature. 
Esthonia together with Livonia and Kurland form the 
three Baltic provinces of Russia. The population on the 
islands of the Gulf of Finland is mostly Esthonian. In 
the higher ranks of society, however, the national language 
is hardly understood, and never spoken. 

Besides the Finns and Esthonians , the Livonians and The Livo- 
the Laps must be reckoned also amongst the same family. 
Their number, however, is small. The population of 
Livonia consists chiefly of Esths, Letts, Russians and Ger- 
mans. The number of Livonians speaking their own dia- 
lect is not more than 5000. 

The Laps or Laplanders inhabit the most Northern The Lap- 
part of Europe. They belong to Sweden and to Russia. 



landers. 



Their number is estimated at 28,000. Their language 
has lately received much attention, and Castren's travels 
give a description of their manners most interesting from 
its simplicity and faithfulness. 

TheBuigaric We need not dwell on the Bulgaric branch. This com- 
prises the A'eremissians and Mordvinians, scattered in dis- 
connected colonies along the Volga, and surrounded by 
Russian and Turkic dialects. Both languages are ex- 
tremely artificial in their grammar, and allow an accumu- 
lation of pronominal affixes at the end of verbs , surpassed 
only by the Bask, the Caucasian, and those American 
dialects that have been called Polysynthetic. 

The general name given to these tribes, Bulgaric, is 
not borrowed from Bulgaria, the present seat of war; 
Bulgaria, on the contrary, received its name (replacing 
that of Moesia) from the Finnic armies by whom it was 
conquered in the seventh century. Bulgarian tribes ad- 
vanced from the Volga to the Don, and after a period, 
passed under the sovereignty of the Avars, on the Don 
and Dniepr, advancing to the Danube in 635, they founded 
the Bulgarian kingdom. This has retained its name to 
the present day, though the Finnic Bulgarians have long- 
been absorbed by Slavonic inhabitants, and both brought 
under Turkish sway since 1392. 

The Pcrmic The third branch also, Permic, concerns us little. 

Branch 

It comprises the idioms of the Votiakes, the Sirianes, 

and the Permians, three dialects of one language. Perm 
was the ancient name for the country between 61°- — 76° E. 
L., and 55° — 65° N. L. The Permic tribes were driven 
westward by their eastern neighbours, the Voguls, and 
thus pressed upon their western neighbours, the Bulgars 
of the Volga. The Votiakes are found between the rivers 
Vyatka and Kama. Northwards follow the Sirianes, in- 
habiting the country on the Upper Kama, while the Eastern 
portion is held by the Permians. These are surrounded 
on the south by the Tatars of Orenburg and the Baskirs ; 
on the north by the Samoiedes, and on the east by Vo- 
guls, who pressed ou them from the Ural. 



9 



These Voguls together with Hungarians and Ostiakes The Ugric 

Brcincn 
form the fourth and last branch of the Finnic family, the 

Ugric. It was in 462, after the dismemberment of At- 
tila's Hunnic empire that these Ugric tribes approached 
Europe. They were then called Onagurs, Saragurs and 
Urogs; and in later times they occur in Russian Chro- 
nicles as Ugry. They are the ancestors of the Hungarians, 
and should not be confounded with the Uigurs, an ancient 
Turkic tribe mentioned before. 

The similarity between the Hungarian language and 
dialects of Finnic origin, spoken east of the Volga, is not 
a new discovery. In 1253, Wilhelm Ruysbroeck, a priest 
who travelled beyond the Volga, remarked that a race 
called Pascatir, who live on the Yaik, spoke the same 
language as the Hungarians. They were then settled east 
of the old Bulgarian kingdom, the capital of which, the 
ancient Bolgari, on the left of the Volga, may still be 
traced in the ruins of Spask. If these Pascatir — the 
portion of the Ugric tribes that remained east of the 
Volga — are identical with the Baskir, as Klaproth sup- 
poses, it would foUow that, in later times, they gave up 
their language, for the present Baskir no longer speak a 
Hungarian, but a Turkic language. The affinity of the 
Hungarian and the Ugro-Finnic dialects was first proved 
philologically by Gyarmathi in 1799. 



A few instances may suffice to show this connection: — 



3ungarian. 


Aeremissian. 


English. 


Atya-m, 


atya-m. 


my father. 


Atya-d, 


atya-t, 


thy father. 


Attya, 


atya-se, 


his father. 


Atya-nk, 


atya-ne. 


our father. 


Atya-tok, 


atya-da, 


your father. 


Atty-ok. 


atya-st. 


their father. 



120 





Declension. 




Hungarian. 


Esthonian. 


English. 


Nom. ver 


werri 


blood 


Gen. vere 


werre 


of blood 


Dat. vernek 


werrele 


to blood 


Ace. vert 


werd 


blood 


AbL verestol 


werrist 
Conjugation. 


from blood. 


Hungarian. 


Esthonian, 


English. 


Lelem 


leian 


I find 


I.eled 


leiad 


thou findest 


Leii 


leiab 


he finds 


Leljiik 


leiame 


we find 


Lelitek 


leiate 


you find 


Lelik 


lei aw ad 


they find. 



121 



Q 



CO 


Ciw 




O 


;h 


+3 


^ 


OS 










n 


1 


«f-i 


Cti 


0) 


J3 


^ 


^ 




s 


<^ 




o 


?H 






^ 




c3 




<D 


lil-H 


«4H 


O 


O 


<D 




O) 


05 


!-i 


?« 


bD 




-73 


s 




t3 




:^; 




a; 




^ 







C3 
















o 


i 

a 

-14 


i 


_d 


a 

a 

,14 


13 


be 
c 

•2» 


.2 




a> 




CO 




CO 


a 

O 


bn 

C 

o 
'^? 


tS5 
O 




00 


g3 

C 


Or" 
/4 




O 


a 

so 


1 

'S 


tS3 

[o 




t- 


S 
1 


CO 


a 

'33 


a 

CO 

'to 


a 

'n 


3 


,£3 












O 


_^ 








CO 


.i4 


13 


3 
^ 




;3 


J3 






'S 


_M 


.22 


<v 


^ 


!> 






io 


'> 


■^ 


'^ 


:c3 


f» 


so 




-^ 


::8 




'S 


*a 


o 


03 


b£) 

a 




M 


a 

'o 


a 


a 

J4 


o 

a 

o 


.a 


a 

T3 
C3 

.a 
o 


a 
2 

,13 




G^ 


■Jo 


% 


o 


>■ 


^ 
^ 


"S 


'S 








M 


^ 


M 


.14 


^ 


ri4 




- 


>-> 


:f3 


;^ 


'ci 


••o 


.^ 


I 










c 


H 






• 










.2 


c5 




. 


























'S 


'S 


.2 

a 




1 


13 


'E 

03 








O 

CO 


0) 


^ 




.S 
^ 


be 
H 

3 






s 


W 


^Ci 


_a 




o 


w 










'sh 


'S 


o 










o 


o 


c8 


c3 


'a 


o 


C> 






:-j 




6C 


b£) 










ts 


'd 






Ih 










s 


-! 


'S 


"B 


Oi 


be 


be 






^ 


t« 


pq 


CQ 


^ 


t> 


ti 





122 

Ascending We have thus examined the four chief classes of the 

^T?ungusic!*^ Turanian family, the Tungusic, Mongolic, Turkic, and 

Mongolic. pij^^i^.^ ^]^Q Tungusic branch stands lowest; its grammar is 



Turkic, and 

Finnic 

Branches. 



innic j^q|. j^^^^Jj richer than Chinese, and in its structure there 
is an absence of that architectonic order which in Chinese 
makes the Cyclopean stones of language hold together 
without grammatical cement. This applies, however, prin- 
cipally to the Man^u; other Tungusic dialects spoken, not 
in China, but in the original seats of the Man^us, are 
even now beginning to develop grammatical forms. 

The Mongolic dialects excel the Tungusic, but in their 
grammar can hardly distinguish between the different parts 
of speech. The spoken idioms of the Mongolians, as of 
the Tungusians, are evidently struggling towards a more 
organic life, and Castren has brought home evidence of 
incipient verbal growth in the language of the Buriats and 
a Tungusic dialect spoken near NyerAinsk. 

This is, however, only a small beginning, if compared 
with the profusion of grammatical resources displayed by 
the Turkic languages. In their system of conjugation, 
the Turkic dialects can hardly be surpassed. Their verbs 
are like branches v/hich break down under the heavy 
burden of fruits and blossoms. The excellence of the 
Finnic languages consists rather in a diminution than in- 
crease of verbal forms ; but in declension, Finnish is even 
more overburdened than Turkish. 

Tiic Nonii- These four branches , together with the Samoiedic, 

S9uthern constitute the Northern or Ural-Altaic Division of the 
of'^'iie^ Turanian family. The Southern division consists of the 
Famdy." Tamulic, the Bhotiya, comprising the Gangetic and Lohitic, 
the Taic, and the Malaic branches. These two divisions 
comprehend very nearly all the languages of Asia, with 
the exception of Chinese. A few, such as Japanese, the 
language of Korea, of the Koriakes, the KamA'adales, &c. 
remain unclassed, but in them also some traces of common 
origin with the Turanian languages have , it is probable, 
survived, and await the discovery of philological re- 
search. 



123 



Genealogical Table of the Turanian Family of Speech. 





Dead 












Living Languages. Languages. 


Branches. 


Classes. 






Dialects 


of the \Kapogires (Upper Tun-3 
guska) § 


1 




















Orotongs (Lower Tun-i 
guska) 5 


> Western \ 










\ 










People of Nyerfcinsk . . . 


} 


T u n g u s i c "" 








Lamutes (Coast of Oh-i 


\ Eastern 










otsk) I 










Mangu (China) 










Sarra - ftlongois (South? 
of Gobi) 5 


\ 










1 










Khalkhas (North of? 


[ Eastern or Mongols v 










Gobi) I 


f Proper 










Saraigol (Tibet and Tan-? 












gut) 5 


] 1 










Kosot (Koko-nur) ) 


\ f 










Dsungar f Olot or 
Torgod { Kalmiiks 
Diirbet j 


i > 


Mongolia 








) Western-Mongols \ 










Aimaks (i. e. tribes of? 

Persia) S 

Tokpas (Tibet) 


1 1 










\ 1 










1 J 










Buriats (Lake Baikal) 


Northern-Mongols 










Uigurs , 


\ Aagataic. S. E. \ 




2 ^ 






Romans 






JiTagatais 


1^ 




Usbeks . 




o 






Turkomans 


) 




^ 


> 




People of Kasan 






a 


2 




Kirgis 


) / 




K 


> ^ 


Baskirs 


^ 




Noarais . 


1 r 




<.\ 


> 




' ^luguia 

Kuniians 


[ 1 


Turkic 


2. 


P 




Karafcais 


) Turkic, N. / 


3 


"< 

■ 


Karakalpaks 






Mesfceryak's 


1 1 










People of Siberia .... 


\ 1 










Yakuts 


/ 1 










People of Derbend . . . 


\ 1 










Aderbigan . . 


> Turkic, W. / 










Krimea .... 










Anatolia . . . 


\ 










Rumelia .... 


1 










Yurazes 


} Northern 
5 Eastern 


S a m i e d i c 






Tawgi 




Yenisei 






Ostiako-Samoiedes .... 
Kamas 








Hungarians 






Voguls 


Ugric 










Ugro-Ostiakes 












A'eremissians 

Mordvins 


? Bulgaric 1 
[ Permic ( 


Finnic 

(Uralic) J 






Permians 

Sirianes 






Voliaks 








Lapps 






Finns 


\ /ludic ; 










Ksths 


( 













Turanian 
Familv 



124 

Scattered Dialects which have become separated from the com- 

^of^'the'^^ mon stock at an early time, and have grown up without 
further intercourse, are sometimes carried away by cer- 
tain individual peculiarities to an extent that effaces every 
sign of their common and original character. Intercourse 
with other nations, and a national literature preserve lan- 
guages from dialectic schisms and the perpetuation of the 
fancies of individual expression. Language, and particu- 
larly Turanian language, is so pliant, that it lends itself 
to endless combinations and complexities. Even in Tur- 
kish, so long under the influence of a literary cultivation, 
the number of possible forms is endless: and some are 
actually used in the dialects of Tataric tribes, which the 
literary Osmanli has discarded. Tribes that have no idea 
of literature or other intellectual occupations, seem occa- 
sionally to take a delight in working their language to 
the utmost limits of grammatical expansion. The Ame- 
rican dialects are a wellknown instance : and the greater 
the seclusion of a tribe, the more amazing this rank ve- 
getation of their grammar. Probably we can form no cor- 
rect idea with what feeling a savage nation looks upon 
its language; perhaps, it may be, as a plaything, a kind 
of intellectual amusement, a maze in which the mind likes 
to lose and to find itself. But the result is the same 
everywhere. If the work of agglutination has once com- 
menced, and if there is nothing like literature or society 
to keep it within limits, two villages, separated only for 
a few generations, will become mutually unintelligible. 
This takes place in America, as well as on the borders 
of India and China; and in the North of Asia, Messer- 
schmidt relates that the Ostiakes, though really speaking 
the same language everywhere, have produced so many 
words and forms peculiar to each tribe, that even within 
the limits of twelve or twenty German miles, conversation 
between them becomes extremely difficult. It must be 
remembered also that the dictionary of these languages 
is small if compared with a Latin or Greek Thesaurus. 
The conversation of Nomadic tribes moves within a nar- 
row circle, and with the great facility of forming new 



125 

words, and the great inducement that a solitary life holds 
out to invent, for the objects which form the world of a 
shepherd or a huntsman , new appellations , half-poe- 
tical perhaps or satirical, we can understand how, after a 
few generations, the dictionary of a Nomadic tribe may 
have gone, as it were, through more than one edition. 
These few hints I give to show from what point of view 
we should look upon the relationship between Nomadic 
dialects; prepared to find but scanty remains of their ori- 
ginal vocabulary among tribes who after being severed 
from the rest, have continued for centuries without lite- 
rature and without tradition, in the fastnesses of the Py- 
renees, the unapproachable valleys of Mount Caucasus, 
or the solitary Tundras of Northern Europe. 

After these preliminary remarks, we proceed at once to a 
consideration of the Caucasian dialects, one of the outstanding 
and degenerated colonies of the Turanian family of speech. 

The first scholar who supplied information on the Ian- Caucasian 

1 . 1 ^ ,^, , XT- Languages. 

guages spoken in the Caucasus, was Klaproth. His tra- 
vels, undertaken under the auspices of the Russian govern- 
ment, fall in the years 1807 and 1808, and their results 
were published in several works, as "Travels in the Cau- 
casus and Georgia"; "Archives for Asiatic Literature, 
History and Languages", and "Asia Polygiotta." 

We begin with the first class. 

He drew a distinction between the Caucasian tribes, 
properly so called, who have lived in their present seats 
from time immemorial; — other tribes now settled there, 
but known to be later immigrants, the Ossetes, and the 
Georgians; ■ — and Turkish tribes, the Bazianes and others. Georgic 

mi /^ • 11 . n , Brancli. 

ihe (jreorgians occupy the larger portion of the 
Caucasian territory. Their frontiers are the river Alazani 
in the east; the Black Sea on the west; the Caucasian 
mountains on the north; and the river Kur, the moun- 
tains of Karabagh, Pambaki, and A'ildir in the south. 
They immigrated from the south-east; and their traditions, 
framed on Christian models, assign the country south of 
the Kur, to Karthlos, son of Thargamos, and great-grand- 
son of Japhet, the reputed ancestor of the Georgians. 



126 

The Georgians are divided into four branches. 

Georgian. I. The Georgians proper, called also Grusians 

or Karthu'hli, inhabit Karthli, Kha'hethi and Imerethi, 
and extend westward to the river Ts'henis-tskali. The 
Psawi and Gudamakari in the high Caucasian mountains, 
east of the river Aragwa, belong to the same branch. 
Mingrolian. 2. The inhabitants ofMingrelia, Odisi, and Guria. 

Their country is the old Colchis, and their language most 
closely allied with the Lazian. 

Suanian. 3. The Suans, or, as they call themselves, Swan (not 

Shnau), inhabit the southern slopes of the Caucasian Alps, 
where they rise from the Black Sea and cross the Isth- 
mus from west to east. Their country lies west of the 
Mount 6'uman-taw, along the rivers Ts'henis-tskali, Enguri, 
and Egrisi. Part of the Suans are independent; others 
are under the rule of Mingrelian princes: none as yet 
subject to Russia. The district of LeA'kum, on the Ts'henis- 
tskali, is inhabited by Georgians; also the district of Rarj'a, 
in the Rion-basin. Both are governed by Russia. These 
Georgians are called Imerians, and all the country west 
of the Mes'hian mountains, goes by the name Imerethi. 
The eastern tribes of ihe Suans are mixed with Os; and 
those further east, the P^awi, 'Hevsurs, and Thusi, along 
the sources of the Eastern Aragva, the Alazan, and the 
Andian Koisu, are mixed with Kek tribes, and have lost 
almost all sign of Georgian descent. 

Ptolemy knew the Suans as Suano-Kolchi. Their 

- language is peculiar on many points, if compared with 

Mingrelian and Lazian: but the coincidences in roots, 

words, and grammatical forms are sufficiently numerous 

to give it a place in the Georgian family. 

Lazian. 4. The Lazes, in the San^akat of Lazistan, belonging 

to the Pashalik of Trebizond. Their language is spoken 
along the coast of the Black Sea from the Promontory 
of Kyemer Burnu to the mouth of the .Sbrok. In the 
south it extends only a few leagues from the coast into 
the interior, while in the north the Lazian is spokenjas 
far east as the watershed of the Z^orok, and even beyond. 
At Batum, which belongs to the San^akat of Lazistan, 



127 



the Grusian dialect of Guria is spoken; at Trebizond — 
Turkish, Greek, and Armenian: but there is no distinct 
Lazian dialect for Trebizond, as Klaproth asserts, though 
Lazes from all parts of Lazistan are gathered within 
that city. 

In the Middle Ages there was a powerful Lazian 
kingdom, comprehending the whole of Lnerethi. The Lazes 
afterwards became subordinate to the princes of Grusia: 
but when these were conquered by the Turks in 1580, 
every valley of Lazistan declared itself independent under 
small princes, who were continually engaged in warfare 
and mutual depredation. Not quite twenty years ago 
Lazistan was conquered by Osman Pasha and incorporated 
with Turkey. The inhabitants are Mohammedans; their 
alphabet is Turkish; and Turkish is frequently spoken 
in their valleys. 

These four branches speak dialects different, but deci- 
dedly cognate, with many varieties in each valley. The 
dialects differ more in their dictionary than in their gram- 
mar. Their grammatical system is throughout identical, 
and connects the language east and west of the Cauca- 
sian watershed, into one family. The mountains that form 
the Isthmus between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea, 
are no barrier between the languages they geographically 
divide. And on the east the chain rises gently, and opens 
many passes towards the western coast. It is difficult to 
say whether Georgic dialects were ever spoken on the 
coast of the Caspian Sea, but from the river Alazani 
westward they form an uninterrupted chain across the 
entire Isthmus. Among them, two, the Lazian and 
MingTelian, agree so much both in words and gram- 
mar, that they may formerly have been but one lan- 
guage, as French and Italian. The people themselves 
are fully aware of the great similarity of their idioms, 
but they would deny all connection with the Suanian. 
Their relation with this dialect is indeed more distant; 
not so much, however, as not to disclose the traces of 
a common family type , when more carefully examined 
and compared. 



128 



Aboiiginal 
Languages. 



Lesghic 
Branch. 



Avarian 
Language. 



Kasiku- 

miikian 

Language. 



The second class oflanguages, spoken by the aboriginal inha- 
bitants of the Caucasian territory is divided into three branches, 
\. Eastern, or Lesghi. 

2. Middle, or Mits^eghi. 

3. Western, or /iTerkessian and Abasian tribes. 
Lesghistan, or the country of the Lesghi, also cal- 
led Daghestan, or the mountain-country, lies between the 
rivers Koisu, Alazani, and the Caspian Sea. The Lesghi 
or Leski, are called Lekhi by the Georgians, Leksi by 
the Armenians, and Leki by the Ossetes, and may there- 
fore be the same as the "Legae" mentioned by Strabo. 

The inhabitants of Lesghistan do not call or esteem 
themselves one people, and according to Klaproth, not 
less than four different languages are spoken in this small 
country. These are: — 

1. Avarian, spoken in the districts of 'Hundsag, or 
Avar, Kaseruk, Hidatle, Mukratle, Ansokul, Kara'hle, 
Gumbet, Arrakan, Burtuna, Anzu'h, Tebel, Tumurga, 
A'hti, Ruthul, Aari and Belakan, amongst the Andi, and 
at Kabu/i:. It is subdivided into various dialects. The 
frontiers of the Avarian are, the river Aksai on the w^est; 
the mountains south of the Aksai, Endery and Tilbak in 
the north; the rivers Koisu in the east; and the Upper 
Samur and Mount 8adagh in the south. 

The language of the districts Dido and Unso on the 
Upper Samur, though mixed with other Caucasian w^ords, 
belongs to the Avarian division. 

2. The language of the Kasikumiiks, spoken in 
various dialects in Kara-kaitak end Tabaseran. Its western 
frontiers are the river Koisu; southern, the river Gurieni; 
the promontories of Tabaseran and North Daghestan on 
the east; and the sources of the Osen to the north. On 
the coast of the Caspian Sea Tatar tribes have settled in 
considerable numbers, and north of Derbend we find not 
less than twelve Turkman villages, the Kaitak. Again 
in the north and east of the Caucasian Isthmus, numerous 
Tatar settlements exists: dating perhaps from the time of 
Alngis-khan. They belong to the Nogai-Tatar, and in 
some places preserve that name. 



Kurian 
Language. 



129 

3. The language of Akuska, spoken also in Tsuda- Akuskian 
kara and Kubi/d, and in the Alps between the Koisu, the 
Upper Manas-rivers and the sources of the Buam. 

4. The language of Kura in south Daghestan. 

The Lesghians are Mohammedans, and like most Cau- 
casians, belong to the orthodox sect of the Sunites. The 
Islam made little progress in the Caucasus in early times, 
except on the Eastern coast, which is open to Persian 
influence, particularly the portion known under the name 
of Daghestan. It was only when compelled to surrender 
the Krimea to Russia, and after the fall of Kuban (now 
^ernomoria) before the Czar, that the Porte found it ex- 
pedient to strengthen its political and religious hold on 
the people of the Caucasus as a barrier against Russian 
influence. Since that time several prophets, Mursids or 
teachers , have risen in the Caucasus and inflamed their 
flocks against the Giaour and the Muscovite. Their chief 
object is to establish a feeling of common interest, 
and of national and religious unity among tribes kept 
asunder unfortunately by mutual feuds, difl'erence of lan- 
guage, and national prejudices. The name of Mahomet 
Mansur, taken prisoner in 1791, and never heard of since 
his confinement in the fortress of Schliisselburg, the name 
of Kasi-Mollah, who fell with the fortress of Himri in 
1832; of Hamsad Beg, murdered in 1834, and Shamyl, 
the living hero, rouse dreadful recollections in the minds 
of Russian officers. 

Very little is known of the Lesghic language, and the 
lists of words given by Klaproth convey hardly any in- 
formation on the grammatical character of this class of 
Caucasian dialects. Bros set has lately paid attention 
to this branch of philology, and collected Avarian songs 
during his stay at Tiflis. There is reason to suppose 
that another distinguished member of the Petersburg Aca- 
demy, M. Schiefner, will take up this subject and prepare 
a grammar of the Avarian dialect. 

II. The language of the Mitsoeghi, a race some- Mitsgeghic 

^ '^ J o J Branch. 

times called Kistian, is spoken west and north-west of 
the Lesghian. Its frontiers are, — in the west, the Upper 

9 



130 

Terek; north, the Little Kabardah and the river Sun^a; 
south, the snowy heights of the Caucasus which sepa- 
rates the Mits^eghi Proper from the 'Hevsurs, Psawi, 
Gudaniakaris , and from Kha'hethi; eastward, the Upper 
Ya'hsai and Endery. Some mixed Mits^eghian tribes, as 
the Thusi, live south of the mountains near the sources 
of the Alazani. 

The Mits^eghi, or as the Russians pronounce it, 
Mitshik, are again divided into three branches. 
GaJgai. The first comprises the Galgai, Halha or Ingus, who 

call themselves Lamur, i. e., mountaineers. They inhabit 
the country on the rivers Kumbalei, Sunf^a and Salgir 
or Asai. 
Karnbuiak. The second Comprises the Karabulak, or Aristoyai, 

as they are called by the ^e.^entsi: but in their own 
language named Ars'hte. They live in the valley of the 
Martan-river. 
Kiih. The third consists of the Ae/t:, or as the Russians 

name them Ae/fentsi, extending from the Karabtdaks east- 
ward to the river Ya'hsai. The name Kek^ with the Russian 
termination, Ae^entsi, is said to be derived from a village 
where one of the first battles between this race and the 
Russians took place, and is sometimes, at least by Russians, 
used as a general name for all Mits^eghian tribes. 

The languages of these three tribes have a common 
type, different from the other Caucasian idioms, but ap- 
proximating in grammar most to the Lesghian dialects, 
particularly the Kasi-Kumukian and Avarian. This applies, 
however, more particularly to the grammatical system of 
the Lesghic and Mits^eghic dialects, while their vocabu- 
laries offer but few coincidences. On the Sun^a the Mits- 
^eghi are considerably mixed with Tatars, and several 
tribes, such as the Borahan, Topli, and Istissu, speak 
Tataric. Ingus is a name given to some Ae/i clans, east 
of the Terek, who border on the Karabulaks in the plains. 
The Ingus were formerly Christians, but are now little 
removed from heathenism. The rest are Mohammedans, and 
all have acted a prominent part in the war against Russia. 

One of the Mitspeghic or Kistian dialects has lately 



131 

been analysed by Professor Schiefner of Petersburg, in 
his article on the Thusch language, published in the Bulle- 
tin Historico-Philologique de TAcadeinie des sciences. He 
identifies the Thus with the Toucrxof,, mentioned by Ptolemy 
(Y, 9.), together with the AiSoupoi, in whom M. Schiefner 
very ingeniously recognises the neighbouring tribe of the 
Didos. Some of his remarks on the phonetic and gram- 
matical features of this dialect are of interest. No word 
in Thus begins with r, a remark which applies equally 
to the Samoiedian, Mongolic and Tataric languages. If 
the letter r occurs in the body of a word, any r, occur- 
ring in terminations, is changed to 1. This feature also 
is shared by the Mongolic. The final i and u of termi- 
nations are frequently placed before the consonant or con- 
sonants which they originally followed. For instance, nax, 
people, Gen. nax-i, or naix; khorth, head, Gen. khorthi 
or khoirth. Similar changes occur in several branches 
of the Arian family. 

The declension of nouns is carried out by means of 
postpositions, and the great variety of cases, coupled with 
the absence of a pure accusative, reminds us strongly of 
the character of some of the most developed Turanian 
languages. 

The pronouns show traces of similarity with the Ab- 
chasian and Tcherkessian, while the vocabulary is said to 
contain many words borrowed from Georgian. Some 
words which are described as taken from Greek are pro- 
bably of later origin, and may have been introduced by 
the Georgian priests. Professor Schiefner denies any close 
grammatical resemblance between the Thus and the Georgic 
dialects, and he is inclined to admit a closer relationship 
between Mits^eghic and Lesghic, than between either and 
Georgic. He throws doubt on Klaproth's opinion that 
there is a connexion between the Caucasic and Samoiedic 
languages, but he has not yet arrived himself at any con- 
clusion as to the real relationship between this interesting 
language and any other class of the great Turanian family. 

HI. The Western Caucasians are best known to us /lerUessic 

Branch. 

by the name of Circassians, jfiTerkessians or Abas- 



9 



132 

sians. They call themselves Adighe or Addi-ghe, which 
Dr. Loewe derives from the Circassian Attaghagh, height, 
and explains it therefore in the sense of Mountaineer. 
In ancient times their seats were not only in the Western 
Caucasus but extended within the Krimea; and Arrian, 
at the beginning of the second century after Christ, men- 
tions Zuxot, supposed to be the Aerkessians on the coast 
of the Black Sea. According to their own traditions, 
one of their tribes, the Kabardah, emigrated in the thir- 
teenth century from the Kuban to the Don, and thence 
to the Krimea: traces of them still exist there in the 
plains between the rivers KaAa and Belbik. They after- 
wards returned to the Kuban, and became a powerful 
tribe under Kabardah princes. 
Kerkessians. The Aerkessians are by the Ossetes and Mingrellans 
called Kasa'h, said to have been their name before the 
Kabardas returned from the Krimea. Kasachia was known 
to Konstantinus Porphyrogeneta, as the country between 
Zychia on the Black Sea and the Alanes. 

At the beginning of the sixteenth century Aerkes- 
sians inhabited the coast of the Lacus Maeotis, from the 
Don to the Kimmerian Bosphorus. Thence they were 
driven back by Russian and Tatar conquests; and the 
present Cossacks, who are Slavonic, are supposed by 
Klaproth to be of mingled A'erkessian and Russian blood. 
The name of the Aerkessians or Circassians on the 
coast of the Black Sea, by the north-western extremity 
of the Caucasian mountains, has been known in Europe 
particularly since 1836, after the capture of the English 
ship Vixen, and through their resistance against Russia, 
whose previous operations had been mainly directed against 
the east of the Caucasian isthmus. Greek writers, how- 
ever, recognized the Aerkessians, settled on their present 
territory, and their name is a corruption of the ancient 
"Kerketoi." In later times the Greeks place the Zychoi 
on the coast, and the Kerketoi further inland. At pre- 
sent the Aerkessians on the sea-coast, and south of the 
Kuban, distinguish themselves by the name of "Adighe," 
while those of the interior, in the Kabardah, south of 



133 

the Malka and along the Terek, are properly called A"er- 
kessian. The Karbardah was one of the first districts 
in the Caucasus conquered by Russia. The inhabitants 
are Mohammedans, and the Adighe also belong mostly to 
the Islam, though traces of their former Christian and 
heathen practices still remain among them. The Ka- 
bardah, east of the Elburs, south of the Malka, and 
extending west beyond the Terek as far as the sources 
of the Sun^a, is divided into Great or Western, and 
Little or Eastern Kabardah. The northern frontier of 
the Adighe is the Kuban. They inhabit the mountains 
from the sea to 58° east longitude, and on the northern 
side of the range, here called the Black or Ahmed Moun- 
tains, they extend even to 59° east longitude. The 
tribes which have maintained their independence are the 
Nato'hua^, S'apsu'h, Abadse'h, and part of the Mo'hos and 
Besle. Subject to Russia are the Bsedu'h, Hattukai, Te- 
mirgoi, and Yegorokoi; all tribes considerably reduced 
in number. 

The Abassians have occupied their present seats on Abassians. 
the Black Sea at least since the Christian era. Arrian 
calls them Abasci, the Georgians Ab'hasi and their country 
Ab'hasethi: the Russians Ab'has, or Gigeth. They name 
themselves Absne. They are divided from the Aerkes- 
sians, on the north, by the river Kapoeti; from the Min- 
grelians, in the south, by the river Enguri, or, according 
to Rosen, by the small river Erthi-tskali. Eastward they 
are conterminous with the Suanes. Some Abassians live 
between the Upper Kuban, the Kuma, and the Malka. 

The chief Abassian tribes in the northern parts of 
the Caucasus, and south of the Kuban, lie from east to 
west; the Besilbai, Midawi, Barrakai, Kasilbeg, Aegreh, 
Ba'h, Tubi, Ubu'h, Bsubbeh, Abase'h, and Ne/ikua^a. 

The Abassians on the right of the Kuban, as far as 
Podkumok, are Russian subjects; on the left, near the 
Little In^ik, they are still independent. Named by them- 
selves Tapanta, they are called Baske'h by Aerkessians, 
Alti-Kesek Abasi by the Tatars. 

Although Russian troops occupy numerous forts on 



134 



the coast, and have there succeeded in subduing some 
tribes as the Zibeld, yet no stranger, least of all a Rus- 
sian, can venture many miles away from the coast, for 
the Abassian tribes are the fiercest of the Caucasus. The 
Russians hold what they call the Little Abadsa; Abadsa 
being the Russian name of the country north of the 
mountain ridge, of which the Little Abadsa is the eastern 
portion. The Uby'h, a clan of highlanders in the north- 
west, who have made themselves formidable to the Rus- 
sians, are probably the same as the Ubi'h or Ubu'h, of 
Abassian origin. The Abassians are darker than the 
Aerkessians. Some call themselves Christian, others Mo- 
hammedan. 

The following is an approximate statement of the 
Caucasian population: 

Aerkessians 280,000 

Abassians . 140,000 

Ossetes 60,000 

Georgians 50,000 

Mitspeghians 110,000 

Lesghians 400,000 

Tatars . 80,000 

1,120,000 

The following statements with regard to the Circas- 
sians are taken from Dr. Loewe's introduction to his 
Dictionary. Dr. Loewe speaks as an eye-witness, and his 
accounts therefore deserve attention even where they differ 
from Klaproth and other authorities. 

"The Circassians occupy the territory of the Caucasus 
situated between the rivers Sotsha and Laba, the lower 
Kuban and the Black Sea. To this territory belong the 
following provinces: — 

"The province of the Bestine, situated between the 
Urup and Khods. 

"The province of the Makhot-hi between the Laba 
and Kars. 

"The provinces of the Yegerukai, the Ademi, 
and the Temirgoi, situated on the coasts of the rivers 



135 



Laba and the Kuban, on the north-western boundaries of 
the province of the Nagai. 

"The provinces of the S-hane, the Gatyukoi, and 
the Bs-hedukh, between the Sha.o.ugwasha and the Afips. 

"The province of the Abasekh is bounded west by 
the district inhabited by the Shapsukh; south by the 
district of the Shapsukh and the Ubykh; east by the 
Sha.o.ugwasha; north by the provinces of the Gatyukoi 
and that of the Bs-hedukh. 

"The province of the Ubykh, situated between the 
Shapsukh and the Ds-hig-het-hi. 

"The province of the Shapsukh, which is bounded 
east by the province of Ubykh, w^est by the pro\ance of 
Natkho-kudash , north by the Kuban, and south by the 
Pontus. 

"The province of the Natko-kuadsh, situated be- 
tween the Taman, the Kuban, the province of the Shap- 
sukh and the Pontus. 

"The province of the Karatsha'i, near the sources 
of the Kuban and the province of the Nagai. 

"The province of the Nagai, between the Kuban 
and the Laba." 

Since the appearance of Sheikh Manzur (?), the prin- 
ces and nobles profess the Mohammedan religion, and 
belong to the sect of the Sunites; but the mass of the 
people adhere faithfully to their former idolatrous wor- 
ship. Their principal deities are: — 

I. Shible, the god of thunder, war, and justice. 

II. Tleps, the god of fire. 

III. Seostseres, the god of the waters, rivers, and 
winds. 

IV. Sekutklia, the god of travellers, and re warder 
of hospitality. 

V. Mesitkha, the god of forests. 



How then, it may be asked, should a man learn all Historical 
these languages? Cardinal Mezzofanti, at the time of his connected 
recent death, spoke not less than fifty-eight; but even g^uagesoftiie 
this number would not suffice to carry a man through ®^^^ " 



136 



all the dialects spoken along the Danube, the Black Sea, 
the Caspian Sea, and in the Russian Empire at large. 
And most of these cannot be learned from Grammars, 
either because none exist; or because they are written 
in a language which would have to be learned first, as 
Russian, German, or Armenian. The Caucasus is called 
by the Persians "the Mountain of Languages," and the 
diversity of dialects spoken there in every valley has 
been the chief obstacle to a united resistance on the part 
of the Caucasian tribes against Russia. The southeast of 
Europe has indeed long been notorious as a Babel of 
tongues. Herodotus * (iv. 24) tells us that caravans of 
Greek merchants, following the course of the Volga upward 
to the Ural Mountains, were accompanied by seven inter- 
preters, speaking seven different languages. These must 
have comprised Slavonic, Tataric, and Finnic dialects, 
spoken in those countries in the time of Herodotus as 
at the present day. In yet earlier times the South-east 
of Europe was the first resting-place for the nations who 
transplanted the seeds of Asia to European soil. Three 
roads were open to their North-westward migrations. 
One, east of the Caspian Sea and West of the Ural 
Mountains, leading to the North of Asia and Europe. 
Another, on the Caucasian Isthmus, whence they would 
advance along the northern coast of the Black Sea, and 
following the course of the Dniepr, Dniestr, or Danube, 
be led into Russia and Germany. A third road was defined 
by the Taurus through Asia Minor, to the point where the 
Hellespont marks the "path of the Hellenes" into Greece 
and Italy. While the main stream of the Arian nations 
passed on, carrying its waves to the northern and western 
shores of Europe, it formed a kind of eddy in the Car- 
pathian Peninsula, and we may still discover in the stag- 
nating dialects North and South of the Danube, the traces 
of the flux and reflux of those tribes who have since 

* An interesting and lucid account of the early inhabitants of 
Russia founded on the researches of Safarik and others, is found 
in a pamphlet by Kurd de Schloezer, "Les premiers Habitants de 
la Russie," Paris, 1846. 



137 



become the ruling nations of Europe. The barbarian in- 
roads, which from the 7th century after Christ, infested 
the regions of civilization and led to the destruction of 
the Greek and Roman Empires, followed all the same 
direction. The country near the Danube and the Black 
Sea has been for ages the battle field of Asia and Europe. 
Each language settled there on the confines of civilization 
and barbarism, recalls a chapter of history. 

The Ossetian in the Caucasus reminds us of the 
Scythian Empire in the 7th century before Christ, and 
of the Median colony of the Sauromatae, then trans- 
planted to the Tanais. 

The Greek names of cities on the coast of the Black 
Sea remind us of their foundation at the same period; 
when the terror of the Cimmerians had subsided, and 
their conquerors, the Scythians, had in turn been anni- 
hilated by the Medians; 600 B.C. It was then that the 
name Axine — "the Inhospitable Sea," passed into the 
Euxine — "the Hospitable." Sin ope, destroyed by the 
Cimmerians, was rebuilt in 632: Odessa was founded 
in 572, B.C. 

Modern Greek, still spoken in Asia Minor and 
Hellas, recalls the whole history of Greece, the decline 
of Byzantium, and the latter war of independence. 

Wallachian, again, speaks of the Roman Empire, 
its wide-spread colonies, and its final annihilation by 
Teutonic and Slavonic armies. 

Hungarian transports us to the murderous forays 
of Attila and his Huns in the 5th century, when it struck 
roots in soil covered with German, Roman, and Mon- 
golic blood. 

The Bulgarian brings back, at least by name, the 
period when Finnic races founded the Bulgarian King- 
dom in the ancient Moesia (635 a. d.). Their name 
remained; though by the year 800 their language and 
nationality had been fully absorbed by the Slavonic in- 
habitants of the country. 

At the end of the 12lth century the Bulgarian King- 
dom was involved in long protracted wars with the Hun- 



138 

garians; and when these two nations, both of Turanian 
origin, had weakened themselves by successive victories 
and defeats, a third Turanian race knocked at the gates 
of Europe, and defeated nations that, united, might have 
repulsed the Turks of Osman. The Turkish language, 
now spoken in all the important cities of Turkey, and 
Asia, regions where its sound was unheard before the 
15th century, teaches an historical lesson which should 
make us pause before we deny to the Turanian race the 
energy of conquest and the power of organization. While 
the Turkish memorializes these latest conquests of Tataric 
tribes in Europe, the Tatar dialects spoken on the Black 
Sea, in the Dobrudsha, the Krimea, and along the Volga, 
remind us of the earlier achievements of the armies of 
^ingiskhan and his successors, of the "Golden Horde," 
and the Mongolian yoke which Russia bore through cen- 
turies. 

Finally, the Slavonic languages, spoken over so 
large an area, and in dialects so closely allied, excite an 
interest not confined to their past alone. The nations 
that speak them, on the confines of Asia and Europe, 
may have great destinies to fulfil in the long future; they 
have means at their command vast as any European 
nation, and if they can throw out of their system the 
bastard blood of a Mongolian nobility, and resist the 
poison of a premature civilization, their history and lite- 
rature may rise high on the horizon of Europe, and 
restore to "Slava" its original meaning of "good report 
and glory". 

List of The best introduction to a knowledge of the Slavonic 

dIcSaries, languages is Russian. For practical purposes this will 
be most desirable to officers, and more available than 
an acquaintance with the minor Slavonic dialects. The 
following books will be found useful for studying 
Russian: — 

Reiff's Russian Grammar, or Principles of the Rus- 
sian language for the use of Englishmen, with synop- 

• The books here mentioned may be obtained from Williams and Norgale, Hen- 
rietta Street, Covent-Garden, from whose catalogues the titles have been taken. 



dialogues, 



139 



tical tables for the declensions and conjugations, gradu- 
ated themes or exercises for the application of the gram- 
matical rules, the correct construction of these exercises, 
and the accentuation of all the Russian words. 8vo., 
1853. 4s. 

Reiff's Dictionary of the Russian, French, German, 
and English Languages. Square 8vo., 1853. 8s. 

Dictionary of the Russian and English Languages. 
1 6mo. Leipzig. 3s. 

Heym (J.), Dictionnaire des Langages Russe, Fran- 
9aise, et Allemande, 3 vols. 8vo., Leipzig. 1844. 18s. 

Hamoniere (Gr.), Dialogues Russes et Fran^ais. 8vo. 
1816. 3s. 6f/. 

It is essential that those who wish to learn Russian 
should begin by familiarizing themselves with the pecu- 
liar system of the Slavonic alphabet as laid down origi- 
nally by Cyrillus. An account of it has been given in 
an earlier portion of this work. This alphabet has been 
one of the greatest barriers between Russia and the in- 
tellectual world of Europe, but there is no hope of its 
being given up at present. On the contrary, it has been 
the policy of Petersburgh to maintain and to extend it 
as much as possible. 

For Bulgarian, the only available grammar is Kyriak 
Cankof, Grammar of the Bulgarian Language. Royal 
8vo., Vienna, 1852. 5s. Qd. The grammar is written 
in German, the Bulgarian words translated in Roman let- 
ters. It contains useful exercises and dialogues. There 
is no modern Bulgarian literature, except a few religious 
books imported from Russia. In 1840, a Bulgarian trans- 
lation of the New Testament was printed by the British 
and Foreign Bible Society. Translations of the Old or 
New Testament, which exist in almost all languages, will 
indeed in all cases be found very useful for a first attempt 
in reading. 

A Bulgarian grammar in English was published by 
E. Riggs, an American Missionary at Smyrna; but whe- 
ther it is obtainable I cannot say. 

For Illyrian, we have Ber lie's Grammar of the 



140 



lUyrian Languages, as spoken in the Southern Slavonic 
countries, in Servia, Bosnia, Dalmatia, Kroatia, and by 
the Illyrians and Servians in Hungary and in the Vojvo- 
dina. Agram, 1849. 6s. It is written in German, printed 
in Roman characters, and contains useful dialogues. 

The Illyrian Grammar ofBabukic was translated into 
German by Frohlich. 8vo., Vienna, 1839. 6s. 

Berlic (A. T.), Grammar of the Illyrian Language 
as spoken by the Serbians and Kroats. Vienna, 1854. 6s. 

Richter and Bellmann, Dictionary of the Illyrian 
and German , and German and Illyrian Languages , for 
the use of Germans and Illyrians in Croatia, Slavonia, 
Syrmia, Dalmatia, Bosnia, Servia, Albania, Ragusa, Mon- 
tenegro, the Herzegovina, the Banat, and Hungary. Vienna, 
1839. 15s. 

Voltiggi (I.), Illyrian, Italian, and German Dic- 
tionary and Grammar. Thick 8vo. (610 pp.) Vienna. 
6s. 6d. 

Principj Elementari della Grammatica Illirica, premessi 
al dizionario Italiano, Latino, Illirico, del P. Ardelia 
della Bella, ed ora di nuovo pubblicati. Ragusa, 1 827. 

Frohlich. Dictionary of the Illyrian and German 
languages. 2 vols. 1854. 10s. 6^^. 

Frohlich. Theoretic and practical Grammar of the 
Illyrian language. Vienna, 1850. 6s. 

Illyrian, as we saw, was used as a general name 
to comprehend all the dialects of the South Slavonians, 
with the exception of Bulgarian, and, according to some, 
of Servian. Of the dialects spoken in Servia, Bosnia, 
Montenegro, Slavonia, and Dalmatia, the Kroatian is per- 
haps the most independent, yet it is only one dialect of 
the language common to all Illyrians. Russians learn 
these dialects with great ease, inasmuch as they resemble 
Russian more than any other Slavonic language. 

Servian. 

Wuk Stephanowitsch, Small Servian Grammar, 
translated into German by Jacob Grimm. 8vo. Berlin, 
1824. 2s. 6f/. 



u 



Wuk Stepbano witsch, Servian, German, and Latin 
Dictionary. 8vo. Vienna, 1818. 22s. 

New Testament in Servian translated by S. Wuk. 
8vo. 1848. 9s. 6^/. 

Wuk, Servian Proverbs in Servian. Alphabetically 
arranged. 8vo. 1850. 6s. 

Milutinovitscli. Songs of the Montenegrians, in 
Servian. 8vo. 5 s. 

Kroatian. 

Gyurkovechky (S.), Kroatian Grammar. 8vo. Ofen, 
1825. 

Slovenian. 

Murko (A. J.), German -Slovenian, and Slovenian- 
German Dictionary, according to the dialects of the Slo- 
venes in Styria, Carinthia, Carniolia, and the West of 
Hungary. 2 vols. 8vo. Gratz, 1833. 10s. 6f/. 

Kopitar, Grammar of the Slavonic Language in 
Carniolia, Carinthia, and Styria. 8vo. Laibach, 1808. 5s. 

Murko, Slovenian Grammar. 8vo. Gratz, 1843. 
2s. 6cl. 

Weissenthurn (Fr.V.), Saggio Grammaticale Italiano- 
Cragnolano. 8vo. Trieste, 1811. 6s. 

The Western Slavonic dialects will be of less prac- 
tical importance, with the exception perhaps of 

Polish. 

Frings (M. T.), Polish, French, and German Dia- 
logues. 8vo. Lemberg, 1847. 3s. 

There is a complete and scientific Polish Dictionary 
with explanations in German, and a comparison of thirteen 
other Slavonic dialects by Linde. 6 vols. 4to. Warsaw, 
1707—14. t 6, 16s. Qd. Though it could hardly obtain a 
place in the Library of an officer, it deserves to be men- 
tioned here as a classical work in Slavonic philology. 

Mongrovius, Polish -English, and English -Polish 
Dictionary. 2 vols. Royal 8vo. Berlin, 1851. 20s. 

Schmidt (M.), Dictionnaire portatif. Polonais et Fran- 
cais. 16mo. Leipzig, 1847. 3s. 



142 



Bohemian. 

Cebusky (A.), Grammar of the Bohemian Language. 
8vo. Vienna, 1854. 2s. 

Bible in Bohemian. 8vo. 1833. 14s. 
Dictionary, Bohemian and German. 1 6mo. Leipzig. 3s. 

Slo vakian. 

Dianiska (K.), Slo vakian Grammar (with Dialogues 
and Selections). 8vo. Vienna, 1850. 4s. 

There is another Slovakian Grammar by Bernolak, 
1790; a dictionary, 1825, and a translation of the Bible, 
1829. 

A tabular arrangement of the four principal Slavonic 
dialects was published by Frohlich, comprehending Bo- 
hemian and Polish, Illyrian and Russian. Vienna, 1847. 
8vo. 4s. 

Classical M^orks on the Slavonic languages in general, 
are — 

8afarik (P. J.), Slavonic Antiquities, translated into 
German. % vols. 8vo. 1853. 15s 6f/. 

Safarik, History of the Slavonic Language and Lite- 
rature. 8vo. Ofen, 1826. 10s. 6c/. 

Safarik, Slovansky Narodopis (Slavonic Ethnology). 
Praze, 1849. 8vo. 

It is hardly necessary to give a list of grammars and 
dictionaries for acquiring a knowledge of German, 
Danish, and Swedish; as any foreign bookseller will 
supply them. 

In the case of the Romance languages also, it will 
be sufficient to mention the grammars and dictionaries for 
Wallachian. These are — 

Alexi (J.), Grammatica Daco-Romana sive Valachica. 
8vo. Vienna, 1826. 3s. 6^ 

Blacewicz (T.), Grammar of the Daco -Romanic, 
Moldavian or Wallachian Language. 8vo. Lemberg, 1844. 
4s. In German, with modern Cyrillic types. Both gram- 
mars contain dialogues. 

Theoklist Schoimul. Theoretic and practical Pocket- 
Grammar of the Romaic or Wallachian language, written 



U3 



in German, and printed with modern Cyrillic types. Vienna, 
1855. 2s. 

Lesicon, Romanescu, Latinescu, Ungarescu, Nem- 
tescu; i. e. , Wallachian, Latin, Hungarian, and German. 
4to. Budae, 1 825. Scarce. 

Vaillant (J. A.), Vocabulaire Fran9ais-Roumain et 
Roumain-Fran9ais. 8. Boucoureshti, 1840. 6s. 

Vaillant (J. A.), Grammaire Roumane a I'usage des 
Fran^ais. 8. Boucourest, 1840. 

For Modern Greek, a grammar that can be recom- 
mended is — 

Corpe (H.), An Introduction to Neo-Hellenic, or 
Modern Greek, containing a guide to its pronunciation 
and an epitome of its grammar. 8vo. London, 1851. 5s. 

A Translation of the Bible into Modern Greek has 
lately been issued from the University Press at Oxford. 

D cheque (F. D.), Dictionnaire Grec-Moderne et Fran- 
cais. 12mo. London, 1825. 5s. 

Lowndes. Modern -Greek and English Dictionary 
royal 8vo. Corfu. 21s. 

For a study of Albanian, little assistance can be 
derived from books. The latest and most comprehensive 
work on Albania is — 

Hahn (J. G. von), Albanian Studies. Thick 4to. 
Jena, 1854. £ \. 10s. 

The first part contains geographical and ethnogra- 
phical notices, travels in Albania, description of customs 
and manners, researches on the origin of the Albanians, 
an account of the Albanian alphabet, and a history of the 
the country. The second part gives a grammar of the 
Toskian dialect, Toskian and Geghan poems, proverbs, 
phrases, stories; and lastly, a dictionary, Albanian-Ger- 
man, and German-Albanian. An extract of this work 
might be useful. The best grammatical compilation is to 
be found in — 

Xy lander (1. v.). The Language of the Albanians 
or Skipetars. 8vo. Frankfort, 1835. 4s. 6c/. (In German.) 

An excellent account of Albania is given by — 

Leake (W. M.), Researches in Greece. London, 4to. 1814. 



U4 



And Hobhouse (J. C), Journey through Albania, 
&c. 4to. London, 1813. 

The great desideratum during the present war will 
no doubt, be a knowledge of Turkish. Most officers will 
probably be satisfied if they are able to speak by inter- 
jections and gestures, and succeed in making a Turk 
understand that they want a horse , or provisions , or 
directions for the road in a country not advanced to 
signposts. This can be learned from dialogues, and even 
without a knowledge of the Turkish alphabet. By far 
the best book for this purpose is — 

Bianchi (C. X.), Le nouveau Guide de la Conver- 
sation en Fran^ais et en Turc. It is so arranged, that 
in learning the dialogues by heart, students acquire the 
grammar without being aware of it. An abridgment of 
this book, in English, would be invaluable. The Turkish 
should be transcribed, however, so as to suit English 
pronunciation. 

Another work which will answer this purpose is — 

Le Dragoman Turc. — Regime sanitaire, Monnaies, 
Vocabulaire, Grammaire. 12mo. Paris, 1854. 2s. 6d. 
brds. 

A pocket Dictionary of the English and Turkish lan- 
guages (the Turkish being expressed in English characters, 
with guide to the correct pronunciation), by W. G. Sauer- 
wein is now in the press and will be very shortly 
published. 

Those, however, who have taste and leisure to study 
Turkish should make themselves, first of all, acquainted 
with the Turkish alphabet, whatever has been said to 
the contrary by our "special correspondents". It is true, 
no doubt, that by means of transcription in Roman cha- 
racters the grammar can be learned, without a previous 
knowledge of the alphabet; but in the long run more 
time is lost than saved by this. The Roman alphabet is 
no doubt better adapted to express the sounds of the 
Turkish language than the Arabic alphabet now used by 
the Turks, in which even when the vowels are written, 



145 



as they invariably are in the Aagataic dialect, three signs 
must suffice to express eight different vowel- sounds. 
But until this great alphabetical revolution is accom- 
plished — until the Turks condescend to write their lan- 
guage in those signs which in time must and will be the 
alphabet of the whole world, any one who wishes to 
acquire a competent know^ledge of Turkish should begin 
with the alphabet, and impress the declensions and con- 
jugations on his memory, in their Turkish dress. Else 
he will find that when he comes to read, his Romanized 
verbs will not answer to their Turkish originals. Then 
the whole must be learned again; with the discovery that 
by this double proceeding the learner has weakened and 
confused what ought to be the most distinct in his memory, 
"les premieres impressions de la grammaire Turque." 
Soldiers know best that in storming a fortress it does 
not answer to leave the detached works untaken; though 
at first they may seem to offer no resistance to advance, 
they are sure to open fire when least expected. 

When the alphabet is once mastered, the pronuncia- 
tion of Turkish is comparatively easy. It is true that vowels 
are generally omitted in writing, but they are frequently in- 
dicated at the beginning of words, and in open syllables. 
Besides there are certain rules which make up for this 
omission of vowel-signs and which are of great assistance 
to the student of Turkish. 

There are two classes of vowels, called sharp and flat. 
A (in psalm), O (in note), U (in flute), I (in ravine) are 
sharp. A (in date or Vater), O (in Konig, pen), U (in 
Giite, une), i (in yield) are flat. As the vowels of every 
word must be either all sharp or all flat, the knowledge 
of the vowel of one syllable is generally sufficient to in- 
dicate the vocalisation of the whole word. There are 
certain consonants which only admit of sharp or flat 
vowels, and hence in many words there is one consonant 
which indicates whether the word is to be pronounced 
so to say, in a sharp or flat key. This law of the 
harmony of vowels which pervades the Turkish and other 
Turanian languages, and which was first fully explained 

10 



146 



by Viguier, would in most instances render all vowel- 
signs except one superfluous. Intercourse with natives 
however, is the only means to acquire the proper pro- 
nunciation of Turkish, of which neither transcription in 
Roman, nor in the still more difficult Armenian or Greek 
characters can give an adequate idea. In the Turkish 
grammar of D. Alexandrides and in his Modern -Greek 
and Turkish Glossary the accent of Turkish is marked 
according to the Greek system; the Armenians mark the 
accent in their transcriptions only Avhere it seems to be 
irregular. Some scholars maintain that there is no accent 
at all in Turkish, others that it is always on the last 
syllable as in French. The distinction between long and 
short vowels also is of little consequence in Turkish. — 

Redhouse (J.W.), Grammaire raisonnee de la Langue 
Ottomane. Royal 8vo. Paris, 1846. 13s. Qd. (Best; 
but why not repeated in English?) 

Boyd (Charles), The Turkish Interpreter, or a New 
Grammar of the Turkish Language. Paris, 1842. 8s. Qtd. 

Pfizmaier (A.), Grammaire Turque, ou developpe- 
ment de trois genres de style, FArabe, le Persan, et le 
Tartare. 8vo. Vienna, 1848. 15s. Qd. 

A very useful book is: 

Dieterici. Chrestomathie Ottomane, precedee de ta- 
bleaux grammaticaux et suivie d'un giossaire Turc-Fran- 
yais. 8vo. Berlin, 1814. 4s. It contains an easy ex- 
planation of the grammatical principles of Turkish, and 
extracts chosen with a view to exhibit the genuine Tur- 
kish style of literature. 

Mirza A. Kazem Beg, Derbend-Nameh , or the 
History of Derbend; Turkish and English. 4to. St. Pe- 
tersburg, 1851. 10s. 4 of. 

By the same author we have the only grammar of 
the different Tataric dialects which deviate from the 
Turkish standard. It is written in Russian, but a Ger- 
man translation has made it more accessible. The trans- 
lation is not, however, altogether satisfactory. 

General Grammar of the Turco- Tataric Language, 



147 



by Mirza A. Kazem Beg; translated by Dr. Julius Th. 
Zenker. Leipzic, 1848. 8vo. 12s. 

The same author has a complete Chrestomathy of the 
Turco-Tataric Dialects ready for the press. Among his 
published works "the history of the Khans of the Crimea" 
Kasan 1832, printed from a unique MS. might at the pre- 
sent moment prove of more general interest. 

The dialect of the Tatars of Kasan can be studied 
in an elementary book, published by Wakhabof, one 
of the masters of the Military School of Kasan. It con- 
tains specimens, dialogues and songs in the Tatari of 
Kasan, with Russian translations. Of still greater im- 
portance is a similar small book, containing proverbs, 
dialogues and fables in the dialect of the Tatars of the 
Crimea, published at Kasan by Krym-Khowadja, 
teacher at Simpheropol. A few specimens of the Turkish 
as spoken in the Caucasus, are given by Bodenstedt 
in the Journal of the German Oriental Society. Vol. V. 
page 245. 

A Tataric translation of the New Testament has been 
printed at Astrachan. 

Specimens of Eastern Tataric dialects are to be found 
in Quatremere's Chrestomathies Orientales. 

For a thorough knowledge of Turkish, a previous 
acquaintance with Persian and Arabic is invaluable. A 
useful Persian Grammar is Meerza Mohammad Ibra- 
heem's Grammar of the Persian language. 8vo. London, 
1841. 21s. 

On Persian dialects there is an Essay by B ere sin 
Recherches sur les dialectes persans, the second part of 
his Recherches sur les dialectes Musulmans. The Persian 
dialects which he examines and of which he gives spe- 
cimens, are the Gilek, Tati, Talyshi, Mazandarani, Gebri 
and the Kurdian of Chorasan and Mosul. 

For the spoken Arabic, there is 

Mouhammad Ayyad el Tantavy, Sheikh. Traite de la 
langue Arabe vulgaire. 8vo. Leipzic, 1850. 6s. 

The most scientific grammar is still Sylvestre de Sacy's 
Grammaire Arabe a I'usage des eleves de Fecole speciale 

10* 



U8 



des langues Orientales vivantes. 2 vols. 8vo. Paris, 
1831. f 2. 105. 

The following may also be recommended, Schier, 
Grammaire Arabe. 8vo. Dresden, 1849. 12s. 

Caspari, Grammatica Arabica in usum Academicorum : 
accedit brevis Chrestomathia. 8vo. Leipzig, 1848. 6s. 

Of Tmigusic, Mongolic, Samoi'edic, and Finnic lan- 
guages, it would be superfluous to recommend grammars 
and dictionaries, as none of them, I suppose, will be 
chosen for practical study. Perhaps an exception might 
be made in favour of Hungarian, which has lately at- 
tracted more attention, and of which English grammars 
and dictionaries may be procured. 

Frereych (E.) , Hungarian and English Dialogues, 
for the use of Travellers and Students. 8vo. Pesth, 
■185!. 2s. 

Csink, Complete Practical Grammar of the Hungarian 
Language, with Exercises, Selections from the best Au- 
thors, and Vocabularies; to which is added a Historical 
Sketch of Hungarian Literature. 8vo. boards. 1854. 8s. 

We now come to the last cluster of languages, the 
dialects spoken in the Caucasian Babel. Here the diffi- 
culties are greatest, and the means of acquiring a know- 
ledge of the languages proportionably small. Not one of 
these numerous dialects has found as yet an English gram- 
marian, and few have been reduced to a grammatical 
system by any grammarian. Klaproth's "Asia Polygiotta" 
gives considerable lists of words which, as a beginning, 
would be found useful; but in the few cases where his 
collections have been checked by later travellers, they 
have not always proved accurate and satisfactory. This 
applies particularly to the Georgian, and its cognate dia- 
lects, Lazian and Mingrelian. Here we have since Klap- 
roth, the works of Brosset and Rosen — 

Br OS set, L'art liberal, ou grammaire Georgienne, 
8vo. Paris, 1834. 10s. 

Brosset, Elements de la langue Georgienne. 8vo. 
Paris, 1837. 12s. 

Klaproth (J.), Vocabulaire et grammaire de la langue 



149 



Georgienne. 8vo. Paris, 1827. i6s. Other works on 
the Caucasus by Klaproth are, "Travels in the Caucasus;" 
"Description of the Russian Provinces betvi^een the Cas- 
pian and Black Sea," Berlin, 1814, 12s; and "Asia Po- 
lyglotta," 4to, and atlas folio. 2i4s. 

Tschubinof, Dictionnaire Georgien-Russe-Fran9ais, 
4to. Petersburg, 1840. 34 s. 

Of the Lazian, Mingrelian, and Suanian, gram- 
matical outlines were published by Rosen in the Trans- 
actions of the Berlin Academy, 1846. 4to. 2s. 

The same author has given a grammar of the Os- 
setian (4to. 1846, 5s.), the only Arian dialect spoken in 
the centre of the Caucasus; and one more complete has 
since been published by 

Sjogren, Ossetian Grammar, with a short Ossetian- 
German and German - Ossetian Vocabulary. Petersburg, 
1844. Thick 4to. 12s. 

Of the remaining dialects spoken between the Caspian 
and the Black Sea no grammars can be procured, as the 
Russian Government, so liberal in other respects in its 
support of linguistic studies , has not thought fit to en- 
courage a study of these mountain idioms. Military inter- 
preters and translators of the Caucasian army are edu- 
cated at Novo-Tcherkask, in the country of the Don Cos- 
sacks, where Arabic, Tataric, Avarian and Tcherkessian 
dialects are taught at the Imperial Gymnasium. At the 
gymnasium of Stawropol also, Tataric and Tscherkessian 
form part of the educational system. (Koppen, p. 233.) 
Grammatical notices and short lists of words may indeed 
be found scattered through the Transactions of different 
Academies, in Klaproth's works, in Adelung's Mithridates, 
4 vols, 8vo., 35s; in Balbi's Atlas Ethnographique , in 
Bell's Journal of a Residence in Circassia, £ 1, 12s, 
and similar publications; but all that could be extracted 
thence, as of practical use, might be brought into a very 
small volume. Rosen's grammatical notices of the Ab- 
'hasian dialect are found in the Transactions of the Ber- 
lin Academy, and give an idea of the Aerkessian, of which 
the Ab'hasian is but a variety. A grammar and dictio- 



150 



nary of Aerkessian were published by L'Huilier, Odessa, 
1846; written in Russian. 

A Circassian Dictionary has lately been published by 
Dr. Loewe. 8vo. 2 Is. It consists of two parts, English- 
Circassian-Turkish, and Circassian-English-Turkish. The 
words were collected by Dr. Loewe from the mouth of 
the natives. 

Chora-Beg-Mursin-Nogma in St. Petersburg is said to 
have composed a Grammar and Dictionary of the Ka- 
bardian language; see Loewe's Circassian Dictionary, p. 4. 

Another work which deserves to be mentioned here is 

F. Bodenstedt, Die Volker des Kaukasus, of which 
a second edition has just been published. It contains 
much useful information on the history, the geography 
and the social state of the Caucasian countries, and is 
written in a pleasant style. 

The southern neighbour of these Caucasian languages, 
the Armenian, of Arian extraction, has met with a bet- 
ter fate. Besides grammars and dictionaries in other lan- 
guages we have here, both in English — 

Aucher (P.)? A Grammar, Armenian and English. 
8vo. Venice, 1832. 6s. 

Aucher (P.), Dictionary, English and Armenian, with 
the assistance of J. Brand. 2 vols. 4to. Venice, 1821. 
1821. 24s. 

Of the Kurdian language neither grammar nor dic- 
tionary can be procured without difficulty. There is 

Maurizio Garzoni, Grammatica e vocabulario della 
lingua Kurda. Rome, 1787. 

Some interesting articles on Kurdian were published 
by Rodiger and Pott, in the "Zeitschrift fiir die Kunde 
des Morgenlandes. Vol. Ill & IV. 



The works here specitied may be had by applying 
to Williams and Norgate, 1 4, Henrietta-street, Covent 
Garden, London. The prices, as marked above, have 
been taken from their Catalogues. 



THE END. 



V. / 






[(HiHjMLKMil^OKl^nfli 






:',:Ci£l^ 






: <icft5<K: 



CMOS 
:csocl 



rcccro 






: cays: .cc^cLC.^ S4^^ V /B^'r:?^ r* Cj 



R^^^^ySlI^^^^^^^^^^^ ^ 



v^ V 



^^^m^^^^^^?% 






Sep 












dxrcci 



'^{£::&::t<^l^<s^ 



C2C(i 



G:<m 



CC ^KJIUM 






(^x3r_cc 



rmra 



re 



ex: 

•cc: 

m 



#iSP^» 



g^^pto 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



003 038 292 4 • 



^.u-^\Ay:^'.^:^X 






A^M^^ 


M 


f;^Mm\ 


B 



v^^yy^^«^^VI^ys*V^Jgg^^gVWWyvwwv, 



i^00mm 



iwywgi^vw 



'C/'^vi^C'C/'Owvuv'. 



mmmmmm^ 






ySf^§y«^vWVVyg^^^j^^^^ 






^^wwwwww^'v 



S&g«' 



yv^&M 



ijij^^d^vvv 



ivyvvyy 



,VY^^V^vv-, -^^-^^^.^^^ 



':yyvv,'\ji 



^^^^^^^^^(^^il^l^^^^^^^ 



/wwww^xywi 



y^yyyi*»^«)^yyi^^^!^^^ 



^■Mfa^^ 



^^5y«'l3V'-vvw 









iyy(jjijjiwy*w^9»: 



iyywwy 



^^jmmm 



^\jm 



ygvygw^ 






««WS«WrS*J«**vw 



